This is a modern-English version of Modern Essays, originally written by unknown author(s).
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
![[Illustration]](images/cover.jpg)
MODERN ESSAYS
SELECTED BY
CHRISTOPHER MORLEY
CURATED BY
CHRISTOPHER MORLEY
NEW YORK
HARCOURT, BRACE AND COMPANY
NEW YORK
HARCOURT, BRACE AND COMPANY
COPYRIGHT. 1921, BY
HARCOURT, BRACE AND COMPANY, INC.
PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. BY
QUINN & BODEN COMPANY, INC.
RAHWAY, N. J.
COPYRIGHT. 1921, BY
HARCOURT, BRACE AND COMPANY, INC.
PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. BY
QUINN & BODEN COMPANY, INC.
RAHWAY, N. J.
PREFACE
IT had been my habit, I am now aware, to speak somewhat lightly of the labors of anthologists: to insinuate that they led lives of bland sedentary ease. I shall not do so again. When the publisher suggested a collection of representative contemporary essays, I thought it would be the most lenient of tasks. But experience is a fine aperitive to the mind.
IT used to casually dismiss the work of anthologists, implying that they lived lives of comfortable inactivity. I won’t make that mistake again. When the publisher proposed putting together a collection of notable contemporary essays, I assumed it would be an easy job. But experience is a great eye-opener.
Indeed the pangs of the anthologist, if he has conscience, are burdensome. There are so many considerations to be tenderly weighed; personal taste must sometimes be set aside in view of the general plan; for every item chosen half a dozen will have been affectionately conned and sifted; and perhaps some favorite pieces will be denied because the authors have reasons for withholding permission. It would be enjoyable (for me, at any rate) to write an essay on the things I have lingered over with intent to include them in this little book, but have finally sacrificed for one reason or another. How many times—twenty at least—I have taken down from my shelf Mr. Chesterton's The Victorian Age in Literature to reconsider whether his ten pages on Dickens, or his glorious summing-up of Decadents and Æsthetes, were not absolutely essential. How many times I have palpitated upon certain passages in The Education of Henry Adams and in Mr. Wells's Outline of History, which, I assured myself, would legitimately stand as essays if shrewdly excerpted.
Indeed, the struggles of the anthologist, if he has a conscience, are tough. There are so many factors to carefully consider; personal taste sometimes has to be set aside for the overall plan. For every piece selected, at least half a dozen have been lovingly reviewed and filtered, and some favorite works may be excluded because the authors have reasons for denying permission. It would be enjoyable (for me, at least) to write an essay about the things I contemplated including in this little book but ultimately sacrificed for one reason or another. How many times—at least twenty—I have taken down Mr. Chesterton's The Victorian Age in Literature to rethink whether his ten pages on Dickens or his brilliant summary of Decadents and Æsthetes were absolutely essential. How many times I have been thrilled by certain passages in The Education of Henry Adams and in Mr. Wells's Outline of History, which I convinced myself would rightly serve as essays if carefully excerpted.
But I usually concluded that would not be quite fair. I have not been overscrupulous in this matter, for the essay is a mood rather than a form; the frontier between the essay and the short story is as imperceptible as is at present the once famous Mason and Dixon line. Indeed, in that pleasant lowland country between the two empires lie (to my way of thinking) some of the most fertile fields of prose—fiction that expresses feeling and character and setting rather than action and plot; fiction beautifully ripened by the lingering mild sunshine of the essayist's mood. This is fiction, I might add, extremely unlikely to get into the movies. I think of short stories such as George Gissing's, in that too little known volume The House of Cobwebs, which I read again and again at midnight with unfailing delight; fall asleep over; forget; and again re-read with undiminished satisfaction. They have no brilliance of phrase, no smart surprises, no worked-up 'situations' which have to be taken at high speed to pass without breakdown over their brittle bridgework of credibility. They have only the modest and faintly melancholy savor of life itself.
But I usually concluded that wouldn’t be quite fair. I haven’t been overly careful about this because the essay is more of a mood than a strict form; the line between the essay and the short story is almost invisible, much like the once-famous Mason and Dixon line. In fact, in that pleasant lowland area between the two genres lie (in my opinion) some of the richest fields of prose—stories that capture emotion, character, and setting rather than just action and plot; stories beautifully matured by the gentle warmth of the essayist's mood. This type of fiction, I should add, is highly unlikely to make it into movies. I think of short stories like those by George Gissing, in that too little-known book The House of Cobwebs, which I read over and over at midnight with consistent joy; I’d fall asleep while reading them, forget them, and then re-read them with the same satisfaction. They don’t have brilliant phrasing, clever twists, or overly complex 'situations' that need to be raced through to avoid collapsing under their flimsy foundations of credibility. They have only the subtle and slightly melancholic taste of life itself.
Yet it is a mere quibble to pretend that the essay does not have easily recognizable manners. It may be severely planned, or it may ramble in ungirdled mood, but it has its own point of view that marks it from the short story proper, or the merely personal memoir. That distinction, easily felt by the sensitive reader, is not readily expressible. Perhaps the true meaning of the word essay—an attempt—gives a clue. No matter how personal or trifling the topic may be, there is always a tendency to generalize, to walk round the subject or the experience, and view it from several vantages; instead of (as in the short story) cutting a carefully landscaped path through a chosen tract of human complication. So an essay can never be more than an attempt, for it is an excursion into the endless. Any student of fiction will admit that in the composition of a short story many entertaining and valuable elaborations may rise in the mind of the author which must be strictly rejected because they do not forward the essential motive. But in the essay (of an informal sort) we ask not relevance to plot, but relevance to mood. That is why there are so many essays that are mere marking time. The familiar essay is easier to write than the short story, but it imposes equal restraints on a scrupulous author. For in fiction the writer is controlled and limited and swept along by his material; but in the essay, the writer rides his pen. A good story, once clearly conceived, almost writes itself; but essays are written.
Yet it’s a small argument to say that the essay doesn't have easily identifiable styles. It might be closely structured, or it might flow freely without constraints, but it has its own perspective that sets it apart from a traditional short story or a simple personal memoir. This distinction, which is easily perceived by an insightful reader, is hard to articulate. Perhaps the true meaning of the word essay—an attempt—provides a hint. Regardless of how personal or trivial the subject might be, there's always a tendency to generalize, to examine the topic or experience from multiple angles, rather than (as in the short story) following a carefully crafted path through a selected area of human complexity. Therefore, an essay can never be more than an attempt, as it's a journey into the infinite. Any fiction student would agree that while writing a short story, many interesting and valuable thoughts may come to the author’s mind that must be discarded because they don't serve the main purpose. However, in an informal essay, we look for relevance to the mood rather than to plot. That’s why there are so many essays that feel like they’re just filling space. The familiar essay is easier to create than the short story, but it places similar limitations on a meticulous writer. In fiction, the author is guided, constrained, and pushed by their material, but in the essay, the writer controls the writing process. A well-conceived story almost writes itself, whereas essays are crafted.
There also we find a pitfall of the personal essay—the temptation to become too ostentatiously quaint, too deliberately 'whimsical' (the word which, by loathsome repetition, has become emetic). The fine flavor and genius of the essay—as in Bacon and Montaigne, Lamb, Hazlitt, Thackeray, Thoreau; perhaps even in Stevenson—is the rich bouquet of personality. But soliloquy must not fall into monologue. One might put it thus: that the perfection of the familiar essay is a conscious revelation of self done inadvertently.
There, we also encounter a trap of the personal essay—the urge to come off as overly quirky, too intentionally 'whimsical' (a term that has become cringe-worthy due to overuse). The true charm and brilliance of the essay—like those by Bacon and Montaigne, Lamb, Hazlitt, Thackeray, Thoreau; perhaps even Stevenson—lies in the vibrant essence of personality. However, a soliloquy shouldn’t turn into a monologue. To put it simply: the ideal personal essay is an honest self-revelation that happens naturally.
The art of the anthologist is the art of the host: his tact is exerted in choosing a congenial group; making them feel comfortable and at ease; keeping the wine and tobacco in circulation; while his eye is tenderly alert down the bright vista of tablecloth, for any lapse in the general cheer. It is well, also, for him to hold himself discreetly in the background, giving his guests the pleasure of clinching the jape, and seeking only, by innocent wiles, to draw each one into some characteristic and felicitous vein. I think I can offer you, in this parliament of philomaths, entertainment of the most genuine sort; and having said so much, I might well retire and be heard no more.
The art of an anthologist is like being a good host: they have the skill to choose a compatible group, make everyone feel comfortable and relaxed, keep the drinks and snacks flowing, and keep an eye on the table to ensure the mood stays cheerful. It’s also important for them to stay somewhat in the background, allowing their guests to enjoy the punchlines and, with a few clever tricks, guiding each person into engaging conversations. I believe I can provide you with true entertainment in this gathering of knowledge lovers; having said that, I could easily step back and let the conversation flow without me.
But I think it is well to state, as even the most bashful host may do, just why this particular company has been called together. My intention is not merely to please the amiable dilettante, though I hope to do that too. I made my choices, first and foremost, with a view to stimulating those who are themselves interested in the arts of writing. I have, to be frank, a secret ambition that a book of this sort may even be used as a small but useful weapon in the classroom. I wanted to bring it home to the student that as brilliant and sincere work is being done to-day in the essay as in any period of our literature. Accordingly the pieces reprinted here are very diverse. There is the grand manner; there is foolery; there is straightforward literary criticism; there is pathos, politics, and the picturesque. But every selection is, in its own way, a work of art. And I would call the reader's attention to this: that the greater number of these essays were written not by retired æsthetes, but by practising journalists in the harness of the daily or weekly press. The names of some of the most widely bruited essayists of our day are absent from this roster, not by malice, but because I desired to include material less generally known.
But I think it’s important to explain, as even the shyest host might do, why this particular gathering has been organized. My goal isn’t just to please the casual enthusiast, although I hope to do that as well. I chose these works mainly to inspire those who are genuinely interested in the art of writing. Honestly, I secretly hope that this book can serve as a small but valuable resource in the classroom. I wanted to show students that exceptional and heartfelt work is being produced today in essays, just like in any other period of our literature. As a result, the pieces included here are quite varied. There’s grandeur, humor, straightforward literary criticism, emotion, politics, and beautiful imagery. But each selection is, in its own way, a piece of art. I’d like to point out that most of these essays were written not by retired art lovers but by active journalists working in the daily or weekly press. Some of the most renowned essayists today are not on this list, not out of spite, but because I wanted to feature lesser-known material.
I should apologize, I suppose, for the very informal tone of the introductory notes on each author. But I conceived the reader in the rôle of a friend spending the evening in happy gossip along the shelves. Pulling out one's favorites and talking about them, now and then reading a chosen extract aloud, and ending (some time after midnight) by choosing some special volume for the guest to take to bed with him—in the same spirit I have compiled this collection. Perhaps the editorial comments have too much the manner of dressing gown and slippers; but what a pleasant book this will be to read in bed!
I should probably apologize for the very casual tone of the introductory notes on each author. But I imagined the reader as a friend spending an evening happily chatting by the shelves. Pulling out favorite books and discussing them, occasionally reading a chosen passage aloud, and finally (sometime after midnight) picking out a special book for the guest to take to bed with them—in that same spirit, I’ve put together this collection. Maybe the editorial comments feel too comfortable, like wearing pajamas and cozy slippers; but what a lovely book this will be to read in bed!
And perhaps this collection may be regarded as a small contribution to Anglo-American friendliness. Of course when I say Anglo-, I mean Brito-, but that is such a hideous prefix. Journalists on this side are much better acquainted with what their professional colleagues are doing in Britain, than they with our concerns. But surely there should be a congenial fraternity of spirit among all who use the English tongue in print. There are some of us who even imagine a day when there may be regular international exchanges of journalists, as there have been of scholars and students. The contributions to this book are rather evenly divided between British and American hands; and perhaps it is not insignificant that two of the most pleasing items come from Canada, where they often combine the virtues of both sides.
And maybe this collection can be seen as a small step toward promoting friendship between Americans and the British. When I say Anglo-, I really mean Brito-, but that prefix sounds pretty terrible. Journalists on this side of the pond are much more up-to-date on what their colleagues in Britain are doing than vice versa. But surely there should be a friendly bond among everyone who writes in English. Some of us even dream of a time when journalists can regularly exchange ideas internationally, just like scholars and students do. The contributions to this book are fairly evenly split between British and American authors, and it’s worth noting that two of the most enjoyable pieces come from Canada, where they often blend the strengths of both sides.
It is a pleasant task to thank the authors and publishers who have assented to the reprinting of these pieces. To the authors themselves, and to the following publishers, I admit my sincere gratitude for the use of material copyrighted by them:—Doubleday Page and Company for the extracts from books by John Macy, Stewart Edward White and Pearsall Smith; Charles Scribner's Sons for Rupert Brooke's Niagara Falls; the New York Sun for Don Marquis's Almost Perfect State; the George H. Doran Company for the essays by Joyce Kilmer and Robert Cortes Holliday; Mr. James B. Pinker for permission to reprint Mr. Conrad's Preface to A Personal Record; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., for the essays by H. M. Tomlinson, A. P. Herbert and Philip Guedalla; Lady Osler for the essay by the late Sir William Osler; Henry Holt and Company for Thomas Burke's The Russian Quarter; E. P. Dutton and Company for A Word for Autumn, by A. A. Milne; the New York Evening Post for the essays by Stuart P. Sherman and Harry Esty Dounce; Harper and Brothers for Marian Storm's A Woodland Valentine; Dodd, Mead and Company for Simeon Strunsky's Nocturne, from his volume Post-Impressions; the Macmillan Company for Beer and Cider, from Professor Saintsbury's Notes on a Cellar Book; Longmans Green and Company for Bertrand Russell's A Free Man's Worship, from Mysticism and Logic; Robert M. McBride and Company for the selection from James Branch Cabell; Harcourt, Brace and Company for the essay by Heywood Broun; The Weekly Review for the essays by O. W. Firkins, Harry Morgan Ayres and Robert Palfrey Utter. The present ownership of the copyright of the essay by Louise Imogen Guiney I have been unable to discover. It was published in Patrins (Copeland and Day, 1897), which has long been out of print. Knowing the purity of my motives I have used this essay, hoping that it might introduce Miss Guiney's exquisite work to the younger generation that knows her hardly at all.
It’s a pleasure to thank the authors and publishers who have agreed to the reprinting of these pieces. I am sincerely grateful to the authors themselves and to the following publishers for allowing me to use their copyrighted material: Doubleday Page and Company for excerpts from books by John Macy, Stewart Edward White, and Pearsall Smith; Charles Scribner's Sons for Rupert Brooke's Niagara Falls; the New York Sun for Don Marquis's Almost Perfect State; the George H. Doran Company for essays by Joyce Kilmer and Robert Cortes Holliday; Mr. James B. Pinker for permission to reprint Mr. Conrad's Preface to A Personal Record; Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., for essays by H. M. Tomlinson, A. P. Herbert, and Philip Guedalla; Lady Osler for the essay by the late Sir William Osler; Henry Holt and Company for Thomas Burke's The Russian Quarter; E. P. Dutton and Company for A Word for Autumn by A. A. Milne; the New York Evening Post for essays by Stuart P. Sherman and Harry Esty Dounce; Harper and Brothers for Marian Storm's A Woodland Valentine; Dodd, Mead and Company for Simeon Strunsky's Nocturne, from his volume Post-Impressions; the Macmillan Company for Beer and Cider, from Professor Saintsbury's Notes on a Cellar Book; Longmans Green and Company for Bertrand Russell's A Free Man's Worship, from Mysticism and Logic; Robert M. McBride and Company for the selection from James Branch Cabell; Harcourt, Brace and Company for the essay by Heywood Broun; The Weekly Review for essays by O. W. Firkins, Harry Morgan Ayres, and Robert Palfrey Utter. I have been unable to find the current copyright owner of the essay by Louise Imogen Guiney. It was published in Patrins (Copeland and Day, 1897), which has been out of print for a long time. Knowing the purity of my intentions, I have decided to use this essay in hopes of introducing Miss Guiney’s beautiful work to the younger generation who hardly knows her at all.
CHRISTOPHER MORLEY
CHRISTOPHER MORLEY
OCTOBER, 1921
OCTOBER 1921
MODERN ESSAYS
MODERN ESSAYS
AMERICAN LITERATURE
By John Macy
This vigorous survey of American letters is the first chapter of John Macy's admirable volume The Spirit of American Literature, published in 1913—a book shrewd, penetrating and salty, which has unfortunately never reached one-tenth of the many readers who would find it permanently delightful and profitable. Mr. Macy has no skill in vaudeville tricks to call attention to himself: no shafts of limelight have followed him across the stage. But those who have an eye for criticism that is vivacious without bombast, austere without bitterness, keen without malice, know him as one of the truly competent and liberal-minded observers of the literary scene.
This dynamic overview of American literature is the first chapter of John Macy's impressive book The Spirit of American Literature, published in 1913—a smart, insightful, and candid work that unfortunately has never reached even a fraction of the many readers who would find it consistently enjoyable and enriching. Mr. Macy doesn’t resort to flashy tricks to grab attention: no spotlight moments have followed him on stage. But those who appreciate criticism that is lively without being over-the-top, serious without being bitter, and sharp without being spiteful recognize him as one of the truly skilled and open-minded commentators on the literary landscape.
Mr. Macy was born in Detroit, 1877; graduated from Harvard in 1899; did editorial service on the Youth's Companion and the Boston Herald; and nowadays lives pensively in Greenwich Village, writing a good deal for The Freeman and The Literary Review. Perhaps, if you were wandering on Fourth Street, east of Sixth Avenue, you might see him treading thoughtfully along, with a wide sombrero hat, and always troubled by an iron-gray forelock that droops over his brow. You would know, as soon as you saw him, that he is a man greatly lovable. I like to think of him as I first saw him, some years ago, in front of the bright hearth of the charming St. Botolph Club in Boston, where he was usually the center of an animated group of nocturnal philosophers.
Mr. Macy was born in Detroit in 1877, graduated from Harvard in 1899, did editorial work for the Youth's Companion and the Boston Herald, and now lives thoughtfully in Greenwich Village, writing a lot for The Freeman and The Literary Review. If you happened to be wandering on Fourth Street, east of Sixth Avenue, you might see him walking thoughtfully along, wearing a wide sombrero hat, always bothered by a drooping iron-gray forelock that falls over his forehead. You would know right away that he is a deeply lovable man. I like to remember him as I first saw him, a few years ago, in front of the bright hearth of the lovely St. Botolph Club in Boston, where he was often the center of a lively group of nighttime philosophers.
The essay was written in 1912, before the very real reawakening of American creative work that began in the 'teens of this century. The reader will find it interesting to consider how far Mr. Macy's remarks might be modified if he were writing to-day.
The essay was written in 1912, before the significant revival of American creative work that started in the 1910s. The reader may find it interesting to think about how much Mr. Macy's comments would change if he were writing today.
The Spirit of American Literature has been reissued in an inexpensive edition by Boni and Liveright. It is a book well worth owning.
The Spirit of American Literature has been released again in a budget-friendly edition by Boni and Liveright. It's a book that's definitely worth having.
AMERICAN literature is a branch of English literature, as truly as are English books written in Scotland or South Africa. Our literature lies almost entirely in the nineteenth century when the ideas and books of the western world were freely interchanged among the nations and became accessible to an increasing number of readers. In literature nationality is determined by language rather than by blood or geography. M. Maeterlinck, born a subject of King Leopold, belongs to French literature. Mr. Joseph Conrad, born in Poland, is already an English classic. Geography, much less important in the nineteenth century than before, was never, among modern European nations, so important as we sometimes are asked to believe. Of the ancestors of English literature "Beowulf" is scarcely more significant, and rather less graceful, than our tree-inhabiting forebears with prehensile toes; the true progenitors of English literature are Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Italian, and French.
AMERICAN literature is a branch of English literature, just like English books written in Scotland or South Africa. Our literature is mostly from the nineteenth century when the ideas and books ofthe western world were freely exchanged among nations and became available to more and more readers. In literature, nationality is defined by language rather than by ancestry or location. M. Maeterlinck, who was born under King Leopold, is part of French literature. Mr. Joseph Conrad, born in Poland, is already considered an English classic. Geography was much less important in the nineteenth century than it had been before, and it was never, among modern European nations, as significant as we are sometimes led to believe. Among the ancestors of English literature, "Beowulf" is hardly more significant, and somewhat less elegant, than our tree-dwelling forebears with grasping toes; the true ancestors of English literature are Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Italian, and French.
American literature and English literature of the nineteenth century are parallel derivatives from preceding centuries of English literature. Literature is a succession of books from books. Artistic expression springs from life ultimately but not immediately. It may be likened to a river which is swollen throughout its course by new tributaries and by the seepages of its banks; it reflects the life through which it flows, taking color from the shores; the shores modify it, but its power and volume descend from distant headwaters and affluents far up stream. Or it may be likened to the race-life which our food nourishes or impoverishes, which our individual circumstances foster or damage, but which flows on through us, strangely impersonal and beyond our power to kill or create.
American literature and English literature from the nineteenth century are both continuations of earlier English literature. Literature builds on what has come before. Artistic expression ultimately comes from life, but not directly. It can be compared to a river that swells during its journey from new streams and the moisture from its banks; it mirrors the life it passes through, picking up color from its surroundings; the banks shape it, but its strength and volume come from far-off sources and tributaries upstream. Alternatively, it can be compared to the collective experiences that our food either sustains or depletes, shaped by our individual situations that support or harm us, yet it flows through us, oddly impersonal and beyond our ability to control or reshape.
It is well for a writer to say: "Away with books! I will draw my inspiration from life!" For we have too many books that are simply better books diluted by John Smith. At the same time, literature is not born spontaneously out of life. Every book has its literary parentage, and students find it so easy to trace genealogies that much criticism reads like an Old Testament chapter of "begats." Every novel was suckled at the breasts of older novels, and great mothers are often prolific of anæmic offspring. The stock falls off and revives, goes a-wandering, and returns like a prodigal. The family records get blurred. But of the main fact of descent there is no doubt.
It's nice for a writer to proclaim, "Forget books! I'm going to find my inspiration from life!" Because honestly, we have way too many books that are just watered-down versions of John Smith's better works. But at the same time, literature doesn’t just pop up out of nowhere; every book has its literary ancestors, and students easily trace these lineages, making a lot of criticism sound like a chapter from the Old Testament filled with "begats." Every novel has been nurtured by older novels, and the great ones often produce weak offspring. The quality fluctuates, sometimes declines, then bounces back, wandering off and returning like a prodigal. The family history can get messy. But there's no doubt about the main fact of lineage.
American literature is English literature made in this country. Its nineteenth-century characteristics are evident and can be analyzed and discussed with some degree of certainty. Its "American" characteristics—no critic that I know has ever given a good account of them. You can define certain peculiarities of American politics, American agriculture, American public schools, even American religion. But what is uniquely American in American literature? Poe is just as American as Mark Twain; Lanier is just as American as Whittier. The American spirit in literature is a myth, like American valor in war, which is precisely like the valor of Italians and Japanese. The American, deluded by a falsely idealized image which he calls America, can say that the purity of Longfellow represents the purity of American home life. An Irish Englishman, Mr. Bernard Shaw, with another falsely idealized image of America, surprised that a face does not fit his image, can ask: "What is Poe doing in that galley?" There is no answer. You never can tell. Poe could not help it. He was born in Boston, and lived in Richmond, New York, Baltimore, Philadelphia. Professor van Dyke says that Poe was a maker of "decidedly un-American cameos," but I do not understand what that means. Facts are uncomfortable consorts of prejudices and emotional generalities; they spoil domestic peace, and when there is a separation they sit solid at home while the other party goes. Irving, a shy, sensitive gentleman, who wrote with fastidious care, said: "It has been a matter of marvel, to European readers, that a man from the wilds of America should express himself in tolerable English." It is a matter of marvel, just as it is a marvel that Blake and Keats flowered in the brutal city of London a hundred years ago.
American literature is English literature created in this country. Its characteristics from the nineteenth century are clear and can be analyzed and discussed with some certainty. However, no critic I know has provided a good account of its "American" characteristics. You can define certain specifics of American politics, American agriculture, American public schools, and even American religion. But what is uniquely American in American literature? Poe is just as American as Mark Twain; Lanier is just as American as Whittier. The American spirit in literature is a myth, just like American bravery in war, which is exactly like the bravery of Italians and Japanese. The American, misled by a falsely idealized image he calls America, might claim that Longfellow's purity reflects the purity of American home life. An Irish Englishman, Mr. Bernard Shaw, holding another falsely idealized image of America, might be surprised that a face doesn’t match his image, asking, "What is Poe doing in that galley?" There’s no answer. You can never really know. Poe couldn't help it. He was born in Boston and lived in Richmond, New York, Baltimore, and Philadelphia. Professor van Dyke claims that Poe created "decidedly un-American cameos," but I don't understand what that means. Facts are uncomfortable companions to prejudices and emotional generalities; they disrupt domestic tranquility, and when there's a separation, they remain solid at home while the other side leaves. Irving, a shy, sensitive gentleman who wrote with meticulous care, said, "It has been a matter of marvel, to European readers, that a man from the wilds of America should express himself in tolerable English." It is a marvel, just as it’s a marvel that Blake and Keats thrived in the harsh city of London a hundred years ago.
The literary mind is strengthened and nurtured, is influenced and mastered, by the accumulated riches of literature. In the last century the strongest thinkers in our language were Englishmen, and not only the traditional but the contemporary influences on our thinkers and artists were British. This may account for one negative characteristic of American literature—its lack of American quality. True, our records must reflect our life. Our poets, enamored of nightingales and Persian gardens, have not altogether forgotten the mocking-bird and the woods of Maine. Fiction, written by inhabitants of New York, Ohio, and Massachusetts, does tell us something of the ways of life in those mighty commonwealths, just as English fiction written by Lancashire men about Lancashire people is saturated with the dialect, the local habits and scenery of that county. But wherever an English-speaking man of imagination may dwell, in Dorset or Calcutta or Indianapolis, he is subject to the strong arm of the empire of English literature; he cannot escape it; it tears him out of his obscure bed and makes a happy slave of him. He is assigned to the department of the service for which his gifts qualify him, and his special education is undertaken by drill-masters and captains who hail from provinces far from his birthplace.
The literary mind is strengthened and nurtured, influenced and mastered, by the wealth of literature. In the last century, the most influential thinkers in our language were British, and both traditional and contemporary influences on our thinkers and artists came from England. This may explain one negative aspect of American literature—its lack of distinctively American qualities. Certainly, our records should reflect our lives. Our poets, infatuated with nightingales and Persian gardens, have not completely overlooked the mockingbird and the woods of Maine. Fiction written by people from New York, Ohio, and Massachusetts does offer insights into life in those great states, just as English fiction created by writers from Lancashire about Lancashire people is rich with the dialect, local customs, and landscapes of that area. But no matter where an English-speaking person with imagination lives, be it Dorset, Calcutta, or Indianapolis, they are under the powerful influence of English literature; they cannot escape it. It pulls them from their humble surroundings and makes them enthusiastic participants. They are assigned to the field of work that suits their talents, and their specialized education is guided by instructors and leaders from places far from where they were born.
Dickens, who writes of London, influences Bret Harte, who writes of California, and Bret Harte influences Kipling, who writes of India. Each is intensely local in subject matter. The affinity between them is a matter of temperament, manifested, for example, in the swagger and exaggeration characteristic of all three. California did not "produce" Bret Harte; the power of Dickens was greater than that of the Sierras and the Golden Gate. Bret Harte created a California that never existed, and Indian gentlemen, Caucasian and Hindoo, tell us that Kipling invented an army and an empire unknown to geographers and war-offices.
Dickens, who writes about London, influences Bret Harte, who writes about California, and Bret Harte influences Kipling, who writes about India. Each of them is intensely local in their subject matter. The connection between them is based on temperament, shown, for example, in the swagger and exaggeration that all three share. California didn't "create" Bret Harte; Dickens's power was greater than that of the Sierras and the Golden Gate. Bret Harte created a version of California that never actually existed, and Indian gentlemen, both Caucasian and Hindu, tell us that Kipling invented an army and an empire that are unknown to geographers and military offices.
The ideas at work among these English men of letters are world-encircling and fly between book and brain. The dominant power is on the British Islands, and the prevailing stream of influence flows west across the Atlantic. Sometimes it turns and runs the other way. Poe influenced Rossetti; Whitman influenced Henley. For a century Cooper has been in command of the British literary marine. Literature is reprehensibly unpatriotic, even though its votaries are, as individual citizens, afflicted with local prides and hostilities. It takes only a dramatic interest in the guns of Yorktown. Its philosophy was nobly uttered by Gaston Paris in the Collège de France in 1870, when the city was beleaguered by the German armies: "Common studies, pursued in the same spirit, in all civilized countries, form, beyond the restrictions of diverse and often hostile nationalities, a great country which no war profanes, no conqueror menaces, where souls find that refuge and unity which in former times was offered them by the city of God." The catholicity of English language and literature transcends the temporal boundaries of states.
The ideas being shared among these English writers are globally influential and connect the book to the mind. The leading force is centered in Britain, and the main current of influence flows west across the Atlantic. Sometimes it reverses course. Poe impacted Rossetti; Whitman inspired Henley. For a century, Cooper has led the British literary scene. Literature is frustratingly unpatriotic, even though its supporters, as individuals, are often caught up in local pride and rivalries. It shows just a passing interest in the battles of Yorktown. Its philosophy was eloquently expressed by Gaston Paris at the Collège de France in 1870, when the city was surrounded by German troops: "Common studies, pursued in the same spirit, in all civilized countries, create, beyond the limitations of various and often conflicting nationalities, a great country that no war desecrates, no conqueror threatens, where souls find the refuge and unity that was once offered by the city of God." The inclusivity of the English language and literature goes beyond the temporary borders of nations.
What, then, of the "provincialism" of the American province of the empire of British literature? Is it an observable general characteristic, and is it a virtue or a vice? There is a sense in which American literature is not provincial enough. The most provincial of all literature is the Greek. The Greeks knew nothing outside of Greece and needed to know nothing. The Old Testament is tribal in its provinciality; its god is a local god, and its village police and sanitary regulations are erected into eternal laws. If this racial localism is not essential to the greatness of early literatures, it is inseparable from them; we find it there. It is not possible in our cosmopolitan age and there are few traces of it in American books. No American poet has sung of his neighborhood with naïve passion, as if it were all the world to him. Whitman is pugnaciously American, but his sympathies are universal, his vision is cosmic; when he seems to be standing in a city street looking at life, he is in a trance, and his spirit is racing with the winds.
What about the "provincialism" of the American part of the British literary empire? Is it a common feature, and is it a good thing or a bad thing? In some ways, American literature isn't provincial enough. The most provincial literature is Greek. The Greeks only knew their own land and didn’t need to know anything beyond it. The Old Testament is tribal in its provincialism; its god is a local deity, and its village laws and regulations are treated as timeless principles. While this racial localism isn’t essential to the greatness of early literatures, it’s tied to them; we see it present. It’s not possible in our global age, and there are hardly any signs of it in American books. No American poet has written passionately about his neighborhood as if it were everything to him. Whitman is aggressively American, but his feelings are universal, and his vision is expansive; when he appears to be standing in a city street observing life, he is actually in a trance, with his spirit racing alongside the winds.
The welcome that we gave Whitman betrays the lack of an admirable kind of provincialism; it shows us defective in local security of judgment. Some of us have been so anxiously abashed by high standards of European culture that we could not see a poet in our own back yard until European poets and critics told us he was there. This is queerly contradictory to a disposition found in some Americans to disregard world standards and proclaim a third-rate poet as the Milton of Oshkosh or the Shelley of San Francisco. The passage in Lowell's "Fable for Critics" about "The American Bulwers, Disraelis and Scotts" is a spoonful of salt in the mouth of that sort of gaping village reverence.
The welcome we gave Whitman reveals a lack of a commendable type of local pride; it shows that we are lacking in a secure judgment about our own culture. Some of us were so intimidated by the high standards of European culture that we couldn't recognize a poet in our own backyard until European poets and critics pointed him out. This is oddly contradictory to some Americans' tendency to ignore global standards and label a mediocre poet as the Milton of Oshkosh or the Shelley of San Francisco. The part in Lowell's "Fable for Critics" about "The American Bulwers, Disraelis and Scotts" is a pinch of salt in the mouth of that kind of wide-eyed, small-town admiration.
Of dignified and self-respecting provincialism, such as Professor Royce so eloquently advocates, there might well be more in American books. Our poets desert the domestic landscape to write pseudo-Elizabethan dramas and sonnets about Mont Blanc. They set up an artificial Tennyson park on the banks of the Hudson. Beside the shores of Lake Michigan they croon the love affairs of an Arab in the desert and his noble steed. This is not a very grave offence, for poets live among the stars, and it makes no difference from what point of the earth's surface they set forth on their aerial adventures. A Wisconsin poet may write very beautifully about nightingales, and a New England Unitarian may write beautifully about cathedrals; if it is beautiful, it is poetry, and all is well.
There could definitely be more of the dignified and self-respecting provincialism that Professor Royce passionately advocates in American literature. Our poets leave the local scenery behind to create fake Elizabethan plays and sonnets about Mont Blanc. They establish a made-up Tennyson park along the Hudson River. By the shores of Lake Michigan, they sing about the romantic exploits of an Arab in the desert and his noble horse. This isn’t a serious issue, as poets reside among the stars, and it doesn’t really matter where on Earth they begin their flights of imagination. A poet from Wisconsin may write beautifully about nightingales, and a Unitarian from New England may beautifully describe cathedrals; if it’s beautiful, it’s poetry, and everything is fine.
The novelists are the worst offenders. There have been few of them; they have not been adequate in numbers or in genius to the task of describing the sections of the country, the varied scenes and habits from New Orleans to the Portlands. And yet, small band as they are, with great domestic opportunities and responsibilities, they have devoted volumes to Paris, which has an able native corps of story-makers, and to Italy, where the home talent is first-rate. In this sense American literature is too globe-trotting, it has too little savor of the soil.
The novelists are the biggest culprits. There haven't been many of them; they haven't had enough numbers or talent to adequately describe the different regions of the country or the diverse scenes and customs from New Orleans to Portland. Yet, despite being a small group with significant domestic opportunities and responsibilities, they've dedicated numerous volumes to Paris, which has plenty of talented local writers, and to Italy, where the homegrown talent is top-notch. In this way, American literature travels too much around the world and lacks a strong sense of its own roots.
Of provincialism of the narrowest type American writers, like other men of imagination, are not guilty to any reprehensible degree. It is a vice sometimes imputed to them by provincial critics who view literature from the office of a London weekly review or from the lecture rooms of American colleges. Some American writers are parochial, for example, Whittier. Others, like Mr. Henry James, are provincial in outlook, but cosmopolitan in experience, and reveal their provinciality by a self-conscious internationalism. Probably English and French writers may be similarly classified as provincial or not. Mr. James says that Poe's collection of critical sketches "is probably the most complete and exquisite specimen of provincialism ever prepared for the edification of men." It is nothing like that. It is an example of what happens when a hack reviewer's work in local journals is collected into a volume because he turns out to be a genius. The list of Poe's victims is not more remarkable for the number of nonentities it includes than "The Lives of the Poets" by the great Doctor Johnson, who was hack for a bookseller, and "introduced" all the poets that the taste of the time encouraged the bookseller to print. Poe was cosmopolitan in spirit; his prejudices were personal and highly original, usually against the prejudices of his moment and milieu. Hawthorne is less provincial, in the derogatory sense, than his charming biographer, Mr. James, as will become evident if one compares Hawthorne's American notes on England, written in long ago days of national rancor, with Mr. James's British notes on America ("The American Scene"), written in our happy days of spacious vision.
American writers, like other imaginative people, aren't really guilty of the narrow-mindedness often attributed to them. This stereotype is sometimes pushed by local critics who evaluate literature from the perspective of a London magazine or American university classrooms. Some American writers do have a limited scope, like Whittier. Others, such as Henry James, might seem provincial in their viewpoints but have a broad experience and show their narrow-mindedness through a forced international perspective. English and French writers might also be labeled as provincial or not. James states that Poe's collection of critical essays "is probably the most complete and exquisite specimen of provincialism ever prepared for the edification of men." That characterization is far off. It’s more about how a hack reviewer’s work in local publications was compiled into a book because he turned out to be a genius. Poe's criticisms are not less remarkable than those in "The Lives of the Poets" by the great Dr. Johnson, who was a hack for a bookseller and highlighted all the poets that the market at the time encouraged him to feature. Poe had a cosmopolitan mindset; his biases were personal and very unique, often directly opposing the biases of his moment and milieu. Hawthorne is actually less narrow-minded, in the pejorative sense, than his charming biographer, Mr. James. This becomes clear when you compare Hawthorne's American perspectives on England, written in a time of national bitterness, with James's British perspectives on America ("The American Scene"), which were written during our more optimistic era.
Emerson's ensphering universality overspreads Carlyle like the sky above a volcanic island. Indeed Carlyle (who knew more about American life and about what other people ought to do than any other British writer earlier than Mr. Chesterton) justly complains that Emerson is not sufficiently local and concrete; Carlyle longs to see "some Event, Man's Life, American Forest, or piece of creation which this Emerson loves and wonders at, well Emersonised." Longfellow would not stay at home and write more about the excellent village blacksmith; he made poetical tours of Europe and translated songs and legends from several languages for the delight of the villagers who remained behind. Lowell was so heartily cosmopolitan that American newspapers accused him of Anglomania—which proves their provincialism but acquits him. Mr. Howells has written a better book about Venice than about Ohio. Mark Twain lived in every part of America, from Connecticut to California, he wrote about every country under the sun (and about some countries beyond the sun), he is read by all sorts and conditions of men in the English-speaking world, and he is an adopted hero in Vienna. It is difficult to come to any conclusion about provincialism as a characteristic of American literature.
Emerson's all-encompassing universality covers Carlyle like the sky over a volcanic island. In fact, Carlyle (who understood American life and what other people should do better than any other British writer before Mr. Chesterton) rightly points out that Emerson is not local or specific enough; Carlyle wishes to see "some Event, Man's Life, American Forest, or piece of creation that this Emerson loves and admires, well Emersonised." Longfellow didn’t just stay home and write more about the great village blacksmith; he took poetic tours of Europe and translated songs and legends from several languages for the enjoyment of the villagers who stayed behind. Lowell was so genuinely cosmopolitan that American newspapers accused him of being overly fond of England—which shows their narrow-mindedness but clears him. Mr. Howells has written a better book about Venice than about Ohio. Mark Twain lived in every part of America, from Connecticut to California; he wrote about every country under the sun (and some countries beyond the sun), he's read by all kinds of people in the English-speaking world, and he is an adopted hero in Vienna. It’s tough to reach any conclusion about provincialism as a feature of American literature.
American literature is on the whole idealistic, sweet, delicate, nicely finished. There is little of it which might not have appeared in the Youth's Companion. The notable exceptions are our most stalwart men of genius, Thoreau, Whitman, and Mark Twain. Any child can read American literature, and if it does not make a man of him, it at least will not lead him into forbidden realms. Indeed, American books too seldom come to grips with the problems of life, especially the books cast in artistic forms. The essayists, expounders, and preachers attack life vigorously and wrestle with the meaning of it. The poets are thin, moonshiny, meticulous in technique. Novelists are few and feeble, and dramatists are non-existent. These generalities, subject to exceptions, are confirmed by a reading of the first fifteen volumes of the Atlantic Monthly, which are a treasure-house of the richest period of American literary expression. In those volumes one finds a surprising number of vigorous, distinguished papers on politics, philosophy, science, even on literature and art. Many talented men and women, whose names are not well remembered, are clustered there about the half dozen salient men of genius; and the collection gives one a sense that the New England mind (aided by the outlying contributors) was, in its one Age of Thought, an abundant and diversified power. But the poetry is not memorable, except for some verses by the few standard poets. And the fiction is naïve. Edward Everett Hale's "The Man Without a Country" is almost the only story there that one comes on with a thrill either of recognition or of discovery.
American literature is generally idealistic, pleasant, delicate, and well-crafted. Much of it could have appeared in the Youth's Companion. The notable exceptions are our most impressive geniuses, Thoreau, Whitman, and Mark Twain. Any child can read American literature, and while it might not shape him into a man, it certainly won’t lead him into questionable territory. In fact, American books rarely tackle the tough issues of life, especially those written in artistic styles. The essayists, explainers, and preachers engage with life actively and grapple with its meaning. The poets are insubstantial, overly sentimental, and particular about technique. There are few novelists and they lack strength, and dramatists are non-existent. These general statements, though there are exceptions, are supported by reading the first fifteen volumes of the Atlantic Monthly, which serve as a treasure trove from the richest period of American literary expression. In those volumes, you can find a surprising number of strong, notable articles on politics, philosophy, science, and even literature and art. Many talented men and women, whose names are not widely recognized, are gathered around the half dozen standout geniuses; and the collection gives a sense that the New England intellect (with contributions from those outside) was, during its Age of Thought, a powerful and diverse force. However, the poetry isn’t memorable, except for some poems by a few well-known poets. And the fiction is simplistic. Edward Everett Hale's "The Man Without a Country" is almost the only story that evokes a thrill of recognition or discovery.
It is hard to explain why the American, except in his exhortatory and passionately argumentative moods, has not struck deep into American life, why his stories and verses are, for the most part, only pretty things, nicely unimportant. Anthony Trollope had a theory that the absence of international copyright threw our market open too unrestrictedly to the British product, that the American novel was an unprotected infant industry; we printed Dickens and the rest without paying royalty and starved the domestic manufacturer. This theory does not explain. For there were many American novelists, published, read, and probably paid for their work. The trouble is that they lacked genius; they dealt with trivial, slight aspects of life; they did not take the novel seriously in the right sense of the word, though no doubt they were in another sense serious enough about their poor productions. "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and "Huckleberry Finn" are colossal exceptions to the prevailing weakness and superficiality of American novels.
It’s hard to understand why Americans, except when they’re passionately arguing or trying to convince others, haven't truly engaged with American life, and why their stories and poems are generally just nice, unimportant pieces. Anthony Trollope suggested that the lack of international copyright left our market too open to British products, making the American novel an unsupported budding industry; we published Dickens and others without paying royalties and starved our local authors. However, this theory doesn’t fully explain the situation. There were plenty of American novelists who were published, read, and likely compensated for their work. The issue is that they just didn’t have genius; they focused on trivial, minor aspects of life; they didn’t take the novel seriously in the right way, though in some sense, they were certainly serious about their lackluster works. "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and "Huckleberry Finn" are massive exceptions to the generally weak and superficial American novels.
Why do American writers turn their backs on life, miss its intensities, its significance? The American Civil War was the most tremendous upheaval in the world after the Napoleonic period. The imaginative reaction on it consists of some fine essays, Lincoln's addresses, Whitman's war poetry, "Uncle Tom's Cabin" (which came before the war but is part of it), one or two passionate hymns by Whittier, the second series of the "Biglow Papers," Hale's "The Man Without a Country"—and what else? The novels laid in war-time are either sanguine melodrama or absurd idyls of maidens whose lovers are at the front—a tragic theme if tragically and not sentimentally conceived. Perhaps the bullet that killed Theodore Winthrop deprived us of our great novelist of the Civil War, for he was on the right road. In a general speculation such a might-have-been is not altogether futile; if Milton had died of whooping cough there would not have been any "Paradise Lost"; the reverse of this is that some geniuses whose works ought inevitably to have been produced by this or that national development may have died too soon. This suggestion, however, need not be gravely argued. The fact is that the American literary imagination after the Civil War was almost sterile. If no books had been written, the failure of that conflict to get itself embodied in some masterpieces would be less disconcerting. But thousands of books were written by people who knew the war at first hand and who had literary ambition and some skill, and from all these books none rises to distinction.
Why do American writers turn away from life, missing its intensity and significance? The American Civil War was the most significant upheaval in the world after the Napoleonic period. The imaginative response to it includes some great essays, Lincoln's speeches, Whitman's war poetry, "Uncle Tom's Cabin" (which was published before the war but is part of it), a few passionate hymns by Whittier, the second series of the "Biglow Papers," Hale's "The Man Without a Country"—and what else? The novels set during the war are either overly sentimental melodrama or ridiculous stories about maidens whose lovers are at the front—a tragic theme if approached seriously instead of sentimentally. Perhaps the bullet that killed Theodore Winthrop denied us our great novelist of the Civil War, as he was on the right path. In a broader speculation, such a what-if is not entirely pointless; if Milton had died of whooping cough, there wouldn’t have been a "Paradise Lost"; conversely, some geniuses whose works should have emerged from this or that national development may have died too soon. However, this idea doesn’t need to be taken too seriously. The fact is that the American literary imagination after the Civil War was nearly barren. If no books had been written, the failure of that conflict to inspire some masterpieces would be less shocking. Yet thousands of books were produced by people who experienced the war firsthand and who had literary ambitions and some talent, yet none of these books achieved significance.
An example of what seems to be the American habit of writing about everything except American life, is the work of General Lew Wallace. Wallace was one of the important secondary generals in the Civil War, distinguished at Fort Donelson and at Shiloh. After the war he wrote "Ben-Hur," a doubly abominable book, because it is not badly written and it shows a lively imagination. There is nothing in it so valuable, so dramatically significant as a week in Wallace's war experiences. "Ben-Hur," fit work for a country clergyman with a pretty literary gift, is a ridiculous inanity to come from a man who has seen the things that Wallace saw! It is understandable that the man of experience may not write at all, and, on the other hand, that the man of secluded life may have the imagination to make a military epic. But for a man crammed with experience of the most dramatic sort and discovering the ability and the ambition to write—for him to make spurious oriental romances which achieve an enormous popularity! The case is too grotesque to be typical, yet it is exceptional in degree rather than in kind. The American literary artist has written about everything under the skies except what matters most in his own life. General Grant's plain autobiography, not art and of course not attempting to be, is better literature than most of our books in artistic forms, because of its intellectual integrity and the profound importance of the subject-matter.
An example of what seems to be the American tendency to write about everything except American life is the work of General Lew Wallace. Wallace was one of the key secondary generals in the Civil War, recognized at Fort Donelson and Shiloh. After the war, he wrote "Ben-Hur," a particularly troubling book, because it's not poorly written and it shows a vivid imagination. There’s nothing in it that’s as valuable or dramatically significant as just a week of Wallace's wartime experiences. "Ben-Hur," suitable work for a country clergyman with a nice literary talent, is a ridiculous absurdity coming from a man who witnessed the events that Wallace did! It makes sense that someone with real experience might not write at all, and conversely, that someone leading a sheltered life could have the imagination to create a military epic. But for a man filled with dramatic experiences who discovers the talent and ambition to write—it's baffling for him to produce fake oriental romances that gain huge popularity! This situation is too absurd to be typical, yet it's more exceptional in degree than in kind. The American literary artist has written about everything under the sun except what truly matters in his own life. General Grant’s straightforward autobiography, not art and certainly not trying to be, is better literature than most of our artistically crafted books because of its intellectual honesty and the profound significance of its subject matter.
Our dreamers have dreamed about many wonderful things, but their faces have been averted from the mightier issues of life. They have been high-minded, fine-grained, eloquent in manner, in odd contrast to the real or reputed vigor and crudeness of the nation. In the hundred years from Irving's first romance to Mr. Howells's latest unromantic novel, most of our books are eminent for just those virtues which America is supposed to lack. Their physique is feminine; they are fanciful, dainty, reserved; they are literose, sophisticated in craftsmanship, but innocently unaware of the profound agitations of American life, of life everywhere. Those who strike the deeper notes of reality, Whitman, Thoreau, Mark Twain, Mrs. Stowe in her one great book, Whittier, Lowell and Emerson at their best, are a powerful minority. The rest, beautiful and fine in spirit, too seldom show that they are conscious of contemporaneous realities, too seldom vibrate with a tremendous sense of life.
Our dreamers have envisioned many amazing things, but they've turned away from the bigger issues in life. They have been idealistic, refined, and eloquent, standing in stark contrast to the real or perceived toughness and rawness of the nation. In the hundred years from Irving's first novel to Mr. Howells's latest unromantic work, most of our books are known for those very qualities that America is thought to lack. Their style is delicate; they are imaginative, elegant, and reserved; they are literate, skilled in their craft, but blissfully unaware of the deep struggles of American life and life everywhere. Those who resonate with the deeper truths of reality—Whitman, Thoreau, Mark Twain, Mrs. Stowe in her one major novel, Whittier, Lowell, and Emerson at their best—form a strong minority. The rest, beautiful and noble in spirit, too often seem oblivious to the realities of their time, too rarely resonate with a powerful sense of life.
The Jason of western exploration writes as if he had passed his life in a library. The Ulysses of great rivers and perilous seas is a connoisseur of Japanese prints. The warrior of 'Sixty-one rivals Miss Marie Corelli. The mining engineer carves cherry stones. He who is figured as gaunt, hardy and aggressive, conquering the desert with the steam locomotive, sings of a pretty little rose in a pretty little garden. The judge, haggard with experience, who presides over the most tragi-comic divorce court ever devised by man, writes love stories that would have made Jane Austen smile.
The explorer Jason writes as if he's spent his whole life in a library. The Ulysses of the great rivers and dangerous seas is an expert on Japanese prints. The warrior from 'Sixty-one competes with Miss Marie Corelli. The mining engineer carves cherry pits. The person portrayed as thin, tough, and assertive, who conquers the desert with a steam engine, sings about a pretty little rose in a lovely little garden. The judge, worn out from experience, who oversees the most tragi-comic divorce court ever created, writes love stories that would have made Jane Austen smile.
Mr. Arnold Bennett is reported to have said that if Balzac had seen Pittsburgh, he would have cried: "Give me a pen!" The truth is, the whole country is crying out for those who will record it, satirize it, chant it. As literary material, it is virgin land, ancient as life and fresh as a wilderness. American literature is one occupation which is not over-crowded, in which, indeed, there is all too little competition for the new-comer to meet. There are signs that some earnest young writers are discovering the fertility of a soil that has scarcely been scratched.
Mr. Arnold Bennett supposedly said that if Balzac had seen Pittsburgh, he would have exclaimed, "Give me a pen!" The reality is that the entire country is yearning for people to document it, critique it, and celebrate it. As material for literature, it’s untouched, as old as life and as fresh as a wilderness. American literature is one field that isn’t overcrowded, where, indeed, there’s far too little competition for newcomers to face. There are indications that some dedicated young writers are realizing the potential of a landscape that has barely been explored.
American fiction shows all sorts of merit, but the merits are not assembled, concentrated; the fine is weak, and the strong is crude. The stories of Poe, Hawthorne, Howells, James, Aldrich, Bret Harte, are admirable in manner, but they are thin in substance, not of large vitality. On the other hand, some of the stronger American fictions fail in workmanship; for example, "Uncle Tom's Cabin," which is still vivid and moving long after its tractarian interest has faded; the novels of Frank Norris, a man of great vision and high purpose, who attempted to put national economics into something like an epic of daily bread; and Herman Melville's "Moby Dick," a madly eloquent romance of the sea. A few American novelists have felt the meaning of the life they knew and have tried sincerely to set it down, but have for various reasons failed to make first-rate novels; for example, Edward Eggleston, whose stories of early Indiana have the breath of actuality in them; Mr. E. W. Howe, author of "The Story of a Country Town"; Harold Frederic, a man of great ability, whose work was growing deeper, more significant when he died; George W. Cable, whose novels are unsteady and sentimental, but who gives a genuine impression of having portrayed a city and its people; and Stephen Crane, who, dead at thirty, had given in "The Red Badge of Courage" and "Maggie" the promise of better work. Of good short stories America has been prolific. Mrs. Wilkins-Freeman, Mrs. Annie Trumbull Slosson, Sarah Orne Jewett, Rowland Robinson, H. C. Bunner, Edward Everett Hale, Frank Stockton, Joel Chandler Harris, and "O. Henry" are some of those whose short stories are perfect in their several kinds. But the American novel, which multiplies past counting, remains an inferior production.
American fiction has its strengths, but they aren't well-organized or focused; the refined aspects are weak, while the bold ones can be rough. The works of Poe, Hawthorne, Howells, James, Aldrich, and Bret Harte are impressive in style, but lack depth and vitality. On the flip side, some of the more powerful American narratives suffer in execution; for instance, "Uncle Tom's Cabin" remains impactful and emotional long after its initial political relevance has diminished; the novels of Frank Norris, who had a grand vision and noble intentions, trying to weave national economics into a sort of daily epic; and Herman Melville's "Moby Dick," an intensely expressive sea adventure. A few American novelists have understood the significance of the lives they portrayed and tried earnestly to capture it, yet for various reasons, they haven’t produced top-tier novels; like Edward Eggleston, whose stories about early Indiana feel very real; Mr. E. W. Howe, who wrote "The Story of a Country Town"; Harold Frederic, a talented writer whose work was becoming richer and more meaningful just before his untimely death; George W. Cable, whose novels can be inconsistent and sentimental, but who authentically reflects a city and its inhabitants; and Stephen Crane, who, dying at thirty, had already shown promise for greater accomplishments in "The Red Badge of Courage" and "Maggie." America has produced a wealth of excellent short stories. Writers like Mrs. Wilkins-Freeman, Mrs. Annie Trumbull Slosson, Sarah Orne Jewett, Rowland Robinson, H. C. Bunner, Edward Everett Hale, Frank Stockton, Joel Chandler Harris, and "O. Henry" have crafted perfect short stories in their respective styles. However, the American novel, despite its overwhelming quantity, remains a lesser achievement.
On a private shelf of contemporary fiction and drama in the English language are the works of ten British authors, Mr. Galsworthy, Mr. H. G. Wells, Mr. Arnold Bennett, Mr. Eden Phillpotts, Mr. George Moore, Mr. Leonard Merrick, Mr. J. C. Snaith, Miss May Sinclair, Mr. William De Morgan, Mr. Maurice Hewlett, Mr. Joseph Conrad, Mr. Bernard Shaw, yes, and Mr. Rudyard Kipling. Beside them I find but two Americans, Mrs. Edith Wharton and Mr. Theodore Dreiser. There may be others, for one cannot pretend to know all the living novelists and dramatists. Yet for every American that should be added, I would agree to add four to the British list. However, a contemporary literature that includes Mrs. Wharton's "Ethan Frome" and Mr. Dreiser's "Jennie Gerhardt" both published last year, is not to be despaired of.
On a private shelf of contemporary fiction and drama in English are the works of ten British authors: Mr. Galsworthy, Mr. H. G. Wells, Mr. Arnold Bennett, Mr. Eden Phillpotts, Mr. George Moore, Mr. Leonard Merrick, Mr. J. C. Snaith, Miss May Sinclair, Mr. William De Morgan, Mr. Maurice Hewlett, Mr. Joseph Conrad, Mr. Bernard Shaw, and Mr. Rudyard Kipling. Next to them, I find only two Americans, Mrs. Edith Wharton and Mr. Theodore Dreiser. There might be more, as it's impossible to know all the current novelists and playwrights. Yet for every American that could be added, I would agree to add four to the British list. However, contemporary literature that includes Mrs. Wharton's "Ethan Frome" and Mr. Dreiser's "Jennie Gerhardt"—both published last year—is not something to be upset about.
In the course of a century a few Americans have said in memorable words what life meant to them. Their performance, put together, is considerable, if not imposing. Any sense of dissatisfaction that one feels in contemplating it is due to the disproportion between a limited expression and the multifarious immensity of the country. Our literature, judged by the great literatures contemporaneous with it, is insufficient to the opportunity and the need. The American Spirit may be figured as petitioning the Muses for twelve novelists, ten poets, and eight dramatists, to be delivered at the earliest possible moment.
Over the last hundred years, a few Americans have captured in powerful words what life means to them. When you look at their work as a whole, it’s significant, though not particularly overwhelming. Any disappointment you might feel when considering it comes from the gap between this limited expression and the vast diversity of the country. Our literature, when compared to the great literatures of its time, falls short of the opportunity and the demand. The American Spirit could be imagined as asking the Muses for twelve novelists, ten poets, and eight playwrights, to be delivered as soon as possible.
MARY WHITE
By WILLIAM ALLEN WHITE
Mary White—one seems to know her after reading this sketch written by her father on the day she was buried—would surely have laughed unbelievingly if told she would be in a book of this sort, together with Joseph Conrad, one of whose books lay on her table. But the pen, in the honest hand, has always been mightier than the grave.
Mary White—it's hard not to feel like you know her after reading this tribute her father wrote on the day she was buried—would definitely have laughed in disbelief if someone told her she would end up in a book like this, alongside Joseph Conrad, one of whose works was on her table. But the pen, in the sincere hand, has always been stronger than the grave.
This is not the sort of thing one wishes to mar with clumsy comment. It was written for the Emporia Gazette, which William Allen White has edited since 1895. He is one of the best-known, most public-spirited and most truly loved of American journalists. He and his fellow-Kansan, E. W. Howe of Atchison, are two characteristic figures in our newspaper world, both masters of that vein of canny, straightforward, humane and humorous simplicity that seems to be a Kansas birthright.
This isn't something you want to spoil with awkward remarks. It was written for the Emporia Gazette, which William Allen White has been editing since 1895. He is one of the most recognized, community-minded, and genuinely beloved journalists in America. He and his fellow Kansan, E. W. Howe from Atchison, are two prominent figures in our newspaper industry, both experts in that straightforward, honest, humane, and humorous simplicity that feels like a Kansas inheritance.
Mr. White was born in Emporia in 1868.
Mr. White was born in Emporia in 1868.
THE Associated Press reports carrying the news of Mary White's death declared that it came as the result of a fall from a horse. How she would have hooted at that! She never fell from a horse in her life. Horses have fallen on her and with her—"I'm always trying to hold 'em in my lap," she used to say. But she was proud of few things, and one was that she could ride anything that had four legs and hair. Her death resulted not from a fall, but from a blow on the head which fractured her skull, and the blow came from the limb of an overhanging tree on the parking.
The Associated Press reports announcing the news of Mary White's death stated that it was caused by a fall from a horse. She would have laughed at that! She never fell off a horse in her life. Horses have fallen on her and with her—"I'm always trying to hold 'em in my lap," she used to say. But she was proud of few things, and one was that she could ride anything with four legs and hair. Her death didn't result from a fall, but from a blow to the head that fractured her skull, and that blow came from the branch of an overhanging tree in the parking lot.
The last hour of her life was typical of its happiness. She came home from a day's work at school, topped off by a hard grind with the copy on the High School Annual, and felt that a ride would refresh her. She climbed into her khakis, chattering to her mother about the work she was doing, and hurried to get her horse and be out on the dirt roads for the country air and the radiant green fields of the spring. As she rode through the town on an easy gallop she kept waving at passers-by. She knew everyone in town. For a decade the little figure with the long pig-tail and the red hair ribbon has been familiar on the streets of Emporia, and she got in the way of speaking to those who nodded at her. She passed the Kerrs, walking the horse, in front of the Normal Library, and waved at them; passed another friend a few hundred feet further on, and waved at her. The horse was walking and, as she turned into North Merchant Street she took off her cowboy hat, and the horse swung into a lope. She passed the Tripletts and waved her cowboy hat at them, still moving gaily north on Merchant Street. A Gazette carrier passed—a High School boy friend—and she waved at him, but with her bridle hand; the horse veered quickly, plunged into the parking where the low-hanging limb faced her, and, while she still looked back waving, the blow came. But she did not fall from the horse; she slipped off, dazed a bit, staggered and fell in a faint. She never quite recovered consciousness.
The last hour of her life was typical of her happiness. She came home after a long day at school, topped off by a tough session working on the content for the High School Annual, and felt that a ride would lift her spirits. She changed into her khakis, chatting with her mom about the work she was doing, and hurried to get her horse so she could hit the dirt roads for some fresh country air and the bright green fields of spring. As she rode through town at an easy gallop, she kept waving at people passing by. She knew everyone in town. For a decade, the little figure with the long pigtail and the red hair ribbon had been a familiar sight on the streets of Emporia, and she was used to chatting with those who greeted her. She passed the Kerrs, who were walking their horse in front of the Normal Library, and waved at them; then she spotted another friend a few hundred feet later and waved at her too. The horse was walking, and as she turned onto North Merchant Street, she took off her cowboy hat, and the horse picked up the pace. She passed the Tripletts and waved her cowboy hat at them, still cheerfully heading north on Merchant Street. A Gazette carrier zoomed by—a High School boy she knew—and she waved at him, but with her bridle hand; the horse quickly veered, crashing into a low-hanging branch as she looked back to wave. The impact came suddenly. But she didn’t fall off the horse; she slipped off, a bit dazed, staggered, and collapsed in a faint. She never fully regained consciousness.
But she did not fall from the horse, neither was she riding fast. A year or so ago she used to go like the wind. But that habit was broken, and she used the horse to get into the open to get fresh, hard exercise, and to work off a certain surplus energy that welled up in her and needed a physical outlet. That need has been in her heart for years. It was back of the impulse that kept the dauntless, little brown-clad figure on the streets and country roads of this community and built into a strong, muscular body what had been a frail and sickly frame during the first years of her life. But the riding gave her more than a body. It released a gay and hardy soul. She was the happiest thing in the world. And she was happy because she was enlarging her horizon. She came to know all sorts and conditions of men; Charley O'Brien, the traffic cop, was one of her best friends. W. L. Holtz, the Latin teacher, was another. Tom O'Connor, farmer-politician, and Rev. J. H. J. Rice, preacher and police judge, and Frank Beach, music master, were her special friends, and all the girls, black and white, above the track and below the track, in Pepville and Stringtown, were among her acquaintances. And she brought home riotous stories of her adventures. She loved to rollick; persiflage was her natural expression at home. Her humor was a continual bubble of joy. She seemed to think in hyperbole and metaphor. She was mischievous without malice, as full of faults as an old shoe. No angel was Mary White, but an easy girl to live with, for she never nursed a grouch five minutes in her life.
But she didn’t fall off the horse, nor was she riding fast. About a year ago, she used to ride like the wind. But that habit was over, and now she used the horse to get out into the open for fresh, intense exercise and to burn off a certain excess energy that built up inside her and needed a physical release. That need had been in her heart for years. It was behind the impulse that kept the fearless, little brown-clad figure roaming the streets and country roads of this community, turning what had been a frail and sickly frame in her early years into a strong, muscular body. But riding gave her more than just physical strength. It unleashed a joyful and adventurous spirit. She was the happiest person in the world. And she was happy because she was broadening her horizons. She got to know all kinds of people; Charley O’Brien, the traffic cop, was one of her best friends. W. L. Holtz, the Latin teacher, was another. Tom O’Connor, a farmer-politician, Rev. J. H. J. Rice, a preacher and police judge, and Frank Beach, a music teacher, were her close friends, and all the girls, black and white, from both sides of the tracks in Pepville and Stringtown, were among her acquaintances. She brought home wild stories of her adventures. She loved to have fun; light-hearted banter was her natural way of communicating at home. Her humor was a constant source of joy. She seemed to think in exaggerations and metaphors. She was playful without being mean, as full of flaws as an old shoe. Mary White wasn’t an angel, but she was easy to live with because she never held onto a grudge for more than five minutes.
With all her eagerness for the out-of-doors, she loved books. On her table when she left her room were a book by Conrad, one by Galsworthy, "Creative Chemistry" by E. E. Slosson, and a Kipling book. She read Mark Twain, Dickens and Kipling before she was ten—all of their writings. Wells and Arnold Bennett particularly amused and diverted her. She was entered as a student in Wellesley in 1922; was assistant editor of the High School Annual this year, and in line for election to the editorship of the Annual next year. She was a member of the executive committee of the High School Y. W. C. A.
With all her enthusiasm for the outdoors, she loved reading. On her table when she left her room were a book by Conrad, one by Galsworthy, "Creative Chemistry" by E. E. Slosson, and a book by Kipling. She read Mark Twain, Dickens, and Kipling before she turned ten — all of their works. Wells and Arnold Bennett particularly entertained her. She started as a student at Wellesley in 1922, was the assistant editor of the High School Annual that year, and was in line to be elected editor of the Annual next year. She was also a member of the executive committee of the High School Y. W. C. A.
Within the last two years she had begun to be moved by an ambition to draw. She began as most children do by scribbling in her school books, funny pictures. She bought cartoon magazines and took a course—rather casually, naturally, for she was, after all, a child with no strong purposes—and this year she tasted the first fruits of success by having her pictures accepted by the High School Annual. But the thrill of delight she got when Mr. Ecord, of the Normal Annual, asked her to do the cartooning for that book this spring, was too beautiful for words. She fell to her work with all her enthusiastic heart. Her drawings were accepted, and her pride—always repressed by a lively sense of the ridiculousness of the figure she was cutting—was a really gorgeous thing to see. No successful artist ever drank a deeper draught of satisfaction than she took from the little fame her work was getting among her schoolfellows. In her glory, she almost forgot her horse—but never her car.
Within the last two years, she had started to feel inspired by a desire to draw. She began like most kids do, by doodling in her school books with silly pictures. She bought comic magazines and took a course—fairly casually, of course, since she was just a kid without any strong goals—and this year she experienced her first taste of success when her drawings were accepted by the High School Annual. But the joy she felt when Mr. Ecord from the Normal Annual asked her to do the cartooning for that book this spring was beyond words. She threw herself into her work with all her enthusiasm. Her drawings were accepted, and her pride—often held back by a keen awareness of how silly she felt—was something truly beautiful to witness. No successful artist ever enjoyed a greater sense of fulfillment than she did from the little recognition her work received from her classmates. In her moment of glory, she almost forgot about her horse—but never her car.
For she used the car as a jitney bus. It was her social life. She never had a "party" in all her nearly seventeen years—wouldn't have one; but she never drove a block in the car in her life that she didn't begin to fill the car with pick-ups! Everybody rode with Mary White—white and black, old and young, rich and poor, men and women. She liked nothing better than to fill the car full of long-legged High School boys and an occasional girl, and parade the town. She never had a "date," nor went to a dance, except once with her brother, Bill, and the "boy proposition" didn't interest her—yet. But young people—great spring-breaking, varnish-cracking, fender-bending, door-sagging carloads of "kids" gave her great pleasure. Her zests were keen. But the most fun she ever had in her life was acting as chairman of the committee that got up the big turkey dinner for the poor folks at the county home; scores of pies, gallons of slaw; jam, cakes, preserves, oranges and a wilderness of turkey were loaded in the car and taken to the county home. And, being of a practical turn of mind, she risked her own Christmas dinner by staying to see that the poor folks actually got it all. Not that she was a cynic; she just disliked to tempt folks. While there she found a blind colored uncle, very old, who could do nothing but make rag rugs, and she rustled up from her school friends rags enough to keep him busy for a season. The last engagement she tried to make was to take the guests at the county home out for a car ride. And the last endeavor of her life was to try to get a rest room for colored girls in the High School. She found one girl reading in the toilet, because there was no better place for a colored girl to loaf, and it inflamed her sense of injustice and she became a nagging harpie to those who, she thought, could remedy the evil. The poor she had always with her, and was glad of it. She hungered and thirsted for righteousness; and was the most impious creature in the world. She joined the Congregational Church without consulting her parents; not particularly for her soul's good. She never had a thrill of piety in her life, and would have hooted at a "testimony." But even as a little child she felt the church was an agency for helping people to more of life's abundance, and she wanted to help. She never wanted help for herself. Clothes meant little to her. It was a fight to get a new rig on her; but eventually a harder fight to get it off. She never wore a jewel and had no ring but her High School class ring, and never asked for anything but a wrist watch. She refused to have her hair up; though she was nearly seventeen. "Mother," she protested, "you don't know how much I get by with, in my braided pigtails, that I could not with my hair up." Above every other passion of her life was her passion not to grow up, to be a child. The tom-boy in her, which was big, seemed to loathe to be put away forever in skirts. She was a Peter Pan, who refused to grow up.
She used the car like a jitney bus. It was her social life. She never had a "party" in her almost seventeen years—wouldn't have one; but she never drove a block in the car without picking someone up! Everyone rode with Mary White—white and black, old and young, rich and poor, men and women. She loved nothing more than to fill the car with tall high school boys and the occasional girl and cruise around town. She never had a "date" or went to a dance, except once with her brother, Bill, and the "boy situation" didn't interest her—not yet. But being surrounded by tons of lively, fun-loving "kids" brought her great joy. She had a strong enthusiasm for life. But the most fun she ever had was being the chairperson of the committee that organized the big turkey dinner for the poor folks at the county home; dozens of pies, gallons of slaw; jam, cakes, preserves, oranges, and a mountain of turkey filled the car and were delivered to the county home. And, being practical, she risked her own Christmas dinner by sticking around to make sure the poor folks actually got it all. Not that she was cynical; she just didn’t want to tempt people. While there, she found an elderly blind Black man who could only make rag rugs, and she collected enough rags from her school friends to keep him busy for a while. The last idea she tried to set up was to take the guests at the county home out for a car ride. And her last effort in life was trying to get a changing room for Black girls at the high school. She discovered one girl reading in the restroom because there was no better place for a Black girl to relax, which fueled her sense of injustice, leading her to pestering those she believed could make a change. She had always wanted to help the less fortunate, and she was happy about it. She craved justice; yet she was the most irreverent person in the world. She joined the Congregational Church without asking her parents; not really for her spiritual benefit. She never felt a spark of religious devotion and would have laughed at a "testimony." But even as a little girl, she saw the church as a way to help people experience more of life’s richness, and she wanted to help. She never sought help for herself. Clothes were of little importance to her. It was tough to get a new outfit on her; but even harder to get it off. She never wore jewelry and had no ring except for her high school class ring, and only asked for a wristwatch. She refused to put her hair up, even though she was almost seventeen. “Mom,” she argued, “you don’t know how much I can get away with in my braided pigtails that I couldn't if my hair were up.” More than anything else, she was passionate about not growing up, about being a kid. The tomboy in her, which was strong, seemed to dread being confined forever to skirts. She was like Peter Pan, refusing to grow up.
Her funeral yesterday at the Congregational Church was as she would have wished it; no singing, no flowers save the big bunch of red roses from her Brother Bill's Harvard classmen—Heavens, how proud that would have made her! and the red roses from the Gazette force—in vases at her head and feet. A short prayer, Paul's beautiful essay on "Love" from the Thirteenth Chapter of First Corinthians, some remarks about her democratic spirit by her friend, John H. J. Rice, pastor and police judge, which she would have deprecated if she could, a prayer sent down for her by her friend, Carl Nau, and opening the service the slow, poignant movement from Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata, which she loved, and closing the service a cutting from the joyously melancholy first movement of Tschaikowski's Pathetic Symphony, which she liked to hear in certain moods on the phonograph; then the Lord's Prayer by her friends in the High School.
Her funeral yesterday at the Congregational Church was just how she would have wanted it: no singing, no flowers except for the big bunch of red roses from her brother Bill's Harvard classmates—Heavens, how proud that would have made her!—and the red roses from the Gazette team, placed in vases at her head and feet. There was a short prayer, Paul's beautiful essay on "Love" from the Thirteenth Chapter of First Corinthians, some comments about her democratic spirit by her friend John H. J. Rice, the pastor and police judge, which she would have downplayed if she could, a prayer sent down for her by her friend Carl Nau, and to open the service, the slow, poignant movement from Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata, which she loved, followed by a selection from the joyfully melancholic first movement of Tschaikovsky's Pathetic Symphony, which she enjoyed listening to in certain moods on the phonograph; then the Lord's Prayer by her friends in the High School.
That was all.
That’s it.
For her pall-bearers only her friends were chosen; her Latin teacher—W. L. Holtz; her High School principal, Rice Brown; her doctor, Frank Foncannon; her friend, W. W. Finney; her pal at the Gazette office, Walter Hughes; and her brother Bill. It would have made her smile to know that her friend, Charley O'Brien, the traffic cop, had been transferred from Sixth and Commercial to the corner near the church to direct her friends who came to bid her good-by.
For her pallbearers, only her friends were selected: her Latin teacher, W. L. Holtz; her high school principal, Rice Brown; her doctor, Frank Foncannon; her friend, W. W. Finney; her buddy from the Gazette office, Walter Hughes; and her brother Bill. It would have made her smile to know that her friend, Charley O'Brien, the traffic cop, had been moved from Sixth and Commercial to the corner near the church to help direct her friends who came to say goodbye.
NIAGARA FALLS
By Rupert Brooke
The poet usually is the best reporter, for he is an observer not merely accurate but imaginative, self-trained to see subtle suggestions, relations and similarities. This magnificent bit of description was written by Rupert Brooke as one of the letters sent to the Westminster Gazette describing his trip in the United States and Canada in 1913. It is included in the volume Letters from America to which Henry James contributed so affectionate and desperately unintelligible a preface—one of the last things James wrote. Brooke's notes on America are well worth reading: they are full of delightful and lively comments, though sometimes much (oh, very much!) too condescending. The last paragraph in this essay is interesting in view of subsequent history.
The poet is often the best reporter because he's not just an accurate observer, but also imaginative, trained to notice subtle hints, connections, and similarities. This amazing description was written by Rupert Brooke as part of letters sent to the Westminster Gazette about his trip to the United States and Canada in 1913. It's included in the volume Letters from America, which features a very affectionate yet confusing preface by Henry James—one of the last things James wrote. Brooke's notes on America are definitely worth a read; they're filled with charming and lively insights, although sometimes they come off as quite (oh, way too!) condescending. The last paragraph of this essay is particularly interesting considering what happened later in history.
Brooke was born in 1887, son of a master at Rugby School; was at King's College, Cambridge; died of blood-poisoning in the Ægean, April 23, 1915.
Brooke was born in 1887, the son of a headmaster at Rugby School; attended King's College, Cambridge; and died of blood poisoning in the Aegean on April 23, 1915.
SAMUEL BUTLER has a lot to answer for. But for him, a modern traveler could spend his time peacefully admiring the scenery instead of feeling himself bound to dog the simple and grotesque of the world for the sake of their too-human comments. It is his fault if a peasant's naïveté has come to outweigh the beauty of rivers, and the remarks of clergymen are more than mountains. It is very restful to give up all effort at observing human nature and drawing social and political deductions from trifles, and to let oneself relapse into wide-mouthed worship of the wonders of nature. And this is very easy at Niagara. Niagara means nothing. It is not leading anywhere. It does not result from anything. It throws no light on the effects of Protection, nor on the Facility for Divorce in America, nor on Corruption in Public Life, nor on Canadian character, nor even on the Navy Bill. It is merely a great deal of water falling over some cliffs. But it is very remarkably that. The human race, apt as a child to destroy what it admires, has done its best to surround the Falls with every distraction, incongruity, and vulgarity. Hotels, powerhouses, bridges, trams, picture post-cards, sham legends, stalls, booths, rifle-galleries, and side-shows frame them about. And there are Touts. Niagara is the central home and breeding-place for all the touts of earth. There are touts insinuating, and touts raucous, greasy touts, brazen touts, and upper-class, refined, gentlemanly, take-you-by-the-arm touts; touts who intimidate and touts who wheedle; professionals, amateurs, and dilettanti, male and female; touts who would photograph you with your arm round a young lady against a faked background of the sublimest cataract, touts who would bully you into cars, char-à-bancs, elevators, or tunnels, or deceive you into a carriage and pair, touts who would sell you picture post-cards, moccasins, sham Indian beadwork, blankets, tee-pees, and crockery, and touts, finally, who have no apparent object in the world, but just purely, simply, merely, incessantly, indefatigably, and ineffugibly to tout. And in the midst of all this, overwhelming it all, are the Falls. He who sees them instantly forgets humanity. They are not very high, but they are overpowering. They are divided by an island into two parts, the Canadian and the American.
SAMUEL BUTLER has a lot to answer for. Without him, a modern traveler could peacefully enjoy the scenery instead of feeling compelled to chase after the simple and absurd aspects of the world just to hear their overly human comments. It’s his fault if a peasant's naïveté has come to overshadow the beauty of rivers, and the words of clergymen are more significant than mountains. It’s incredibly refreshing to stop trying to understand human nature and draw social and political conclusions from trivial matters, and instead immerse oneself in the wide-eyed wonder of nature. And this is very easy at Niagara. Niagara doesn’t mean anything. It doesn’t lead anywhere. It doesn’t stem from anything. It doesn’t shed light on the effects of Protection, the Facility for Divorce in America, Corruption in Public Life, Canadian character, or even the Navy Bill. It’s just a massive amount of water falling over some cliffs. But it is astonishing in that simplicity. The human race, much like a child, tends to ruin what it admires, and has done its best to surround the Falls with every distraction, absurdity, and tackiness. Hotels, power plants, bridges, trams, picture postcards, fake legends, stalls, booths, shooting galleries, and sideshows clutter the area. And then there are the touts. Niagara is the central hub and breeding ground for all the touts in the world. There are subtle touts and loud touts, greasy touts, shameless touts, and classy, refined, gentlemanly touts who take you by the arm; some intimidate, while others sweet-talk; there are professionals, amateurs, and dilettanti, both male and female; touts who want to photograph you with your arm around a young lady against a staged backdrop of the greatest waterfall, touts who pressure you into cars, char-à-bancs, elevators, or tunnels, or trick you into a carriage and pair, touts who will sell you postcards, moccasins, fake Indian beaded crafts, blankets, teepees, and dishes, and finally, touts who seem to have no purpose other than to simply, relentlessly, and tirelessly promote. And amidst all this chaos, towering over everything, are the Falls. Anyone who sees them instantly forgets about humanity. They aren’t very tall, but they are stunningly powerful. They are split by an island into two sections, the Canadian and the American.
Half a mile or so above the Falls, on either side, the water of the great stream begins to run more swiftly and in confusion. It descends with ever-growing speed. It begins chattering and leaping, breaking into a thousand ripples, throwing up joyful fingers of spray. Sometimes it is divided by islands and rocks, sometimes the eye can see nothing but a waste of laughing, springing, foamy waves, turning, crossing, even seeming to stand for an instant erect, but always borne impetuously forward like a crowd of triumphant feasters. Sit close down by it, and you see a fragment of the torrent against the sky, mottled, steely, and foaming, leaping onward in far-flung criss-cross strands of water. Perpetually the eye is on the point of descrying a pattern in this weaving, and perpetually it is cheated by change. In one place part of the flood plunges over a ledge a few feet high and a quarter of a mile or so long, in a uniform and stable curve. It gives an impression of almost military concerted movement, grown suddenly out of confusion. But it is swiftly lost again in the multitudinous tossing merriment. Here and there a rock close to the surface is marked by a white wave that faces backwards and seems to be rushing madly up-stream, but is really stationary in the headlong charge. But for these signs of reluctance, the waters seem to fling themselves on with some foreknowledge of their fate, in an ever wilder frenzy. But it is no Maeterlinckian prescience. They prove, rather, that Greek belief that the great crashes are preceded by a louder merriment and a wilder gaiety. Leaping in the sunlight, careless, entwining, clamorously joyful, the waves riot on towards the verge.
About half a mile above the Falls, on both sides, the water of the great stream starts to flow more quickly and chaotically. It rushes down with increasing speed, chattering and leaping, breaking into countless ripples and splashes of spray. Sometimes it’s divided by islands and rocks, and at other times, all you can see is a wild expanse of laughing, bouncing, foamy waves that turn and cross each other, even appearing to stand still for a moment, but always being pushed forward like a crowd of triumphant celebrators. If you sit close by, you can see a piece of the torrent against the sky, mottled, silvery, and foamy, leaping onward in distant, crisscrossing strands of water. Your eyes are constantly about to spot a pattern in this weaving, yet are repeatedly frustrated by change. In one spot, part of the flood drops over a ledge a few feet high and about a quarter of a mile long, forming a smooth and stable curve. It gives an impression of almost military coordination that suddenly emerges from chaos. But it quickly disappears again into the multitude of playful splashes. Here and there, a rock just below the surface is marked by a white wave that faces backward and seems to rush madly upstream, but is actually stationary in the rush. Aside from these signs of hesitation, the waters seem to hurl themselves forward with some instinct of their fate, in an increasingly wild frenzy. But it’s not a profound awareness of what's to come. Rather, it reflects the Greek belief that great crashes are preceded by louder laughter and wilder joy. Leaping in the sunlight, carefree, twisting, and joyfully clamorous, the waves surge toward the edge.
But there they change. As they turn to the sheer descent, the white and blue and slate color, in the heart of the Canadian Falls at least, blend and deepen to a rich, wonderful, luminous green. On the edge of disaster the river seems to gather herself, to pause, to lift a head noble in ruin, and then, with a slow grandeur, to plunge into the eternal thunder and white chaos below. Where the stream runs shallower it is a kind of violet color, but both violet and green fray and frill to white as they fall. The mass of water, striking some ever-hidden base of rock, leaps up the whole two hundred feet again in pinnacles and domes of spray. The spray falls back into the lower river once more; all but a little that fines to foam and white mist, which drifts in layers along the air, graining it, and wanders out on the wind over the trees and gardens and houses, and so vanishes.
But there, everything changes. As they approach the steep drop, the white, blue, and gray colors, at least in the heart of the Canadian Falls, blend and deepen into a rich, vibrant, glowing green. On the edge of disaster, the river seems to gather herself, to pause, to raise her head majestically in ruin, and then, with a slow grandeur, to plunge into the eternal roar and white chaos below. Where the water runs shallower, it takes on a kind of violet hue, but both violet and green fray and frill to white as they cascade down. The mass of water, hitting some unseen base of rock, leaps back up the full two hundred feet in peaks and domes of spray. The spray falls back into the lower river once more; all but a little that turns to foam and white mist, which drifts in layers through the air, graining it, and wanders out on the wind over the trees, gardens, and houses, and then disappears.
The manager of one of the great power-stations on the banks of the river above the Falls told me that the center of the riverbed at the Canadian Falls is deep and of a saucer shape. So it may be possible to fill this up to a uniform depth, and divert a lot of water for the power-houses. And this, he said, would supply the need for more power, which will certainly soon arise, without taking away from the beauty of Niagara. This is a handsome concession of the utilitarians to ordinary sight-seers. Yet, I doubt if we shall be satisfied. The real secret of the beauty and terror of the Falls is not their height or width, but the feeling of colossal power and of unintelligible disaster caused by the plunge of that vast body of water. If that were taken away, there would be little visible change, but the heart would be gone.
The manager of one of the major power stations on the river above the Falls told me that the center of the riverbed at the Canadian Falls is deep and shaped like a saucer. So, it might be possible to fill it to a uniform depth and divert a lot of water for the powerhouses. He said this would meet the increasing demand for power, which will definitely arise soon, without diminishing the beauty of Niagara. This is a nice compromise from the utilitarians for regular visitors. However, I doubt we’ll be satisfied. The true essence of the beauty and awe of the Falls isn’t in their height or width, but in the overwhelming sense of power and the incomprehensible disaster caused by the plunge of that massive body of water. If that were taken away, there might not be much visible change, but the heart would be lost.
The American Falls do not inspire this feeling in the same way as the Canadian. It is because they are less in volume, and because the water does not fall so much into one place. By comparison their beauty is almost delicate and fragile. They are extraordinarily level, one long curtain of lacework and woven foam. Seen from opposite, when the sun is on them, they are blindingly white, and the clouds of spray show dark against them. With both Falls the color of the water is the ever-altering wonder. Greens and blues, purples and whites, melt into one another, fade, and come again, and change with the changing sun. Sometimes they are as richly diaphanous as a precious stone, and glow from within with a deep, inexplicable light. Sometimes the white intricacies of dropping foam become opaque and creamy. And always there are the rainbows. If you come suddenly upon the Falls from above, a great double rainbow, very vivid, spanning the extent of spray from top to bottom, is the first thing you see. If you wander along the cliff opposite, a bow springs into being in the American Falls, accompanies you courteously on your walk, dwindles and dies as the mist ends, and awakens again as you reach the Canadian tumult. And the bold traveler who attempts the trip under the American Falls sees, when he dare open his eyes to anything, tiny baby rainbows, some four or five yards in span, leaping from rock to rock among the foam, and gamboling beside him, barely out of hand's reach, as he goes. One I saw in that place was a complete circle, such as I have never seen before, and so near that I could put my foot on it. It is a terrifying journey, beneath and behind the Falls. The senses are battered and bewildered by the thunder of the water and the assault of wind and spray; or rather, the sound is not of falling water, but merely of falling; a noise of unspecified ruin. So, if you are close behind the endless clamor, the sight cannot recognize liquid in the masses that hurl past. You are dimly and pitifully aware that sheets of light and darkness are falling in great curves in front of you. Dull omnipresent foam washes the face. Farther away, in the roar and hissing, clouds of spray seem literally to slide down some invisible plane of air.
The American Falls don't evoke the same feeling as the Canadian ones. It's because they have less volume and the water doesn't concentrate in one spot as much. In comparison, their beauty is more delicate and fragile. They form a long, even curtain of lacework and frothy water. When viewed from the opposite side, especially in the sunlight, they appear dazzlingly white, with dark clouds of spray contrasting against them. With both Falls, the color of the water is a constantly changing wonder. Greens and blues, purples and whites blend together, fade, and re-emerge, shifting with the sunlight. Sometimes, they are as richly translucent as a precious gem, glowing from within with a deep, mysterious light. Other times, the intricate white foam becomes thick and creamy. And there are always rainbows. If you suddenly approach the Falls from above, a bright double rainbow stretching from top to bottom of the spray is the first thing you notice. If you stroll along the opposite cliff, a rainbow appears in the American Falls, following you as you walk, shrinking and disappearing with the mist, then reappearing as you reach the Canadian chaos. The adventurous traveler who dares to venture under the American Falls sees, when he can finally open his eyes, small rainbows, about four or five yards wide, hopping from rock to rock in the foam, frolicking just out of reach as he moves. One I saw there was a complete circle, unlike anything I had seen before, and so close that I could almost step on it. It’s a terrifying journey beneath and behind the Falls. Your senses are overwhelmed by the roar of the water and the onslaught of wind and spray; or rather, the sound isn't just the water falling, it's a noise of sheer devastation. So, standing right behind the constant noise, you can't really recognize liquid in the masses rushing past. You become vaguely and pitifully aware that sheets of light and shadow are falling in grand arcs in front of you. Thick, persistent foam splashes against your face. Further away, in the cacophony and hissing, clouds of spray seem to slide down an invisible plane of air.
Beyond the foot of the Falls the river is like a slipping floor of marble, green with veins of dirty white, made by the scum that was foam. It slides very quietly and slowly down for a mile or two, sullenly exhausted. Then it turns to a dull sage green, and hurries more swiftly, smooth and ominous. As the walls of the ravine close in, trouble stirs, and the waters boil and eddy. These are the lower rapids, a sight more terrifying than the Falls, because less intelligible. Close in its bands of rock the river surges tumultuously forward, writhing and leaping as if inspired by a demon. It is pressed by the straits into a visibly convex form. Great planes of water slide past. Sometimes it is thrown up into a pinnacle of foam higher than a house, or leaps with incredible speed from the crest of one vast wave to another, along the shining curve between, like the spring of a wild beast. Its motion continually suggests muscular action. The power manifest in these rapids moves one with a different sense of awe and terror from that of the Falls. Here the inhuman life and strength are spontaneous, active, almost resolute; masculine vigor compared with the passive gigantic power, female, helpless and overwhelming, of the Falls. A place of fear.
Beyond the foot of the Falls, the river resembles a slipping floor of marble, green with streaks of dirty white from the foam. It glides quietly and slowly for a mile or two, looking sullenly exhausted. Then it shifts to a dull sage green and rushes more swiftly, smooth and ominous. As the walls of the ravine close in, trouble brews, and the waters churn and swirl. These are the lower rapids, even more terrifying than the Falls because they are less understandable. Confined by the rocky banks, the river surges forward wildly, twisting and jumping as if possessed. It's forced into a visibly curved shape. Wide sheets of water rush past. Sometimes it shoots up into a tower of foam taller than a house or leaps with incredible speed from one massive wave to another, along the shining curve in between, like the leap of a wild animal. Its movement constantly suggests muscular strength. The power shown in these rapids evokes a different kind of awe and fear than that of the Falls. Here, the raw energy and strength feel spontaneous, active, almost determined; it’s a masculine vigor compared to the passive, colossal, and overwhelming power of the Falls. A place of fear.
One is drawn back, strangely, to a contemplation of the Falls, at every hour, and especially by night, when the cloud of spray becomes an immense visible ghost, straining and wavering high above the river, white and pathetic and translucent. The Victorian lies very close below the surface in every man. There one can sit and let great cloudy thoughts of destiny and the passage of empires drift through the mind; for such dreams are at home by Niagara. I could not get out of my mind the thought of a friend, who said that the rainbows over the Falls were like the arts and beauty and goodness, with regard to the stream of life—caused by it, thrown upon its spray, but unable to stay or direct or affect it, and ceasing when it ceased. In all comparisons that rise in the heart, the river, with its multitudinous waves and its single current, likens itself to a life, whether of an individual or of a community. A man's life is of many flashing moments, and yet one stream; a nation's flows through all its citizens, and yet is more than they. In such places, one is aware, with an almost insupportable and yet comforting certitude, that both men and nations are hurried onwards to their ruin or ending as inevitably as this dark flood. Some go down to it unreluctant, and meet it, like the river, not without nobility. And as incessant, as inevitable, and as unavailing as the spray that hangs over the Falls, is the white cloud of human crying.... With some such thoughts does the platitudinous heart win from the confusion and thunder of a Niagara peace that the quietest plains or most stable hills can never give.
One is oddly drawn back to thinking about the Falls at every hour, especially at night, when the mist becomes a huge, visible ghost, straining and wavering high above the river, white, sorrowful, and translucent. The Victorian spirit lies just beneath the surface in every person. Here, one can sit and let grand, cloudy thoughts about fate and the rise and fall of empires drift through the mind; for such dreams belong by Niagara. I couldn't shake the thought of a friend who said that the rainbows over the Falls symbolized the arts, beauty, and goodness, in relation to the flow of life—created by it, projected onto its mist, but unable to stay or control it, and vanishing when it does. In all the comparisons that arise in the heart, the river, with its countless waves and its single current, resembles a life, whether of an individual or a community. A person's life is made up of many fleeting moments, yet is one continuous stream; a nation flows through all its citizens, but is greater than they. In such places, one feels, with an almost unbearable yet comforting certainty, that both individuals and nations are swept towards their downfall or conclusion as inevitably as this dark torrent. Some approach it without resistance and meet it, like the river, with a sense of nobility. And just as constant, inevitable, and futile as the mist that hovers over the Falls, is the white cloud of human sorrow... With such thoughts, the cliché-ridden heart finds a kind of peace in the chaos and roar of Niagara that the calmest plains or most stable hills can never provide.
THE ALMOST PERFECT STATE
By Don Marquis
Don Marquis is a real name, not a pseudonym; it is pronounced Markwiss, not Markee. I reprint here two of Mr. Marquis's amiable meditations on the "Almost Perfect State," which have appeared in the column (The Sun Dial) conducted by him for ten years in the New York Sun. According to the traditional motto of sun-dials, Mr. Marquis's horologe usually numbers only the serene hours; but sometimes, when the clear moonlight of his Muse is shining, it casts darker and even more precious shadows of satire and mysticism. His many readers know by this time the depth and reach of his fun and fancy. Marquis is a true philosopher and wit, his humor adorns a rich and mellow gravity. When strongly moved he sometimes utters an epigram that rings like steel leaving the scabbard.
Don Marquis is a real name, not a fake one; it's pronounced Markwiss, not Markee. I’m sharing two of Mr. Marquis’s thoughtful reflections on the "Almost Perfect State," which he has written for his column (The Sun Dial) in the New York Sun for ten years. According to the traditional saying about sundials, Mr. Marquis's clock usually counts only the pleasant hours; but sometimes, when the bright moonlight of his inspiration shines through, it casts darker and even more valuable shadows of satire and mysticism. His many readers are now familiar with the depth and range of his humor and imagination. Marquis is a genuine philosopher and wit, his humor enriches a deep and mellow seriousness. When he’s strongly inspired, he sometimes delivers an epigram that strikes like steel being drawn from its sheath.
There are many things to be said against American newspapers, but much of the indictment is quashed when one considers that every now and then they develop a writer like Don Marquis. The violent haste, pressure and instancy of newspaper routine, purgatorial to some temperaments, is a genuine stimulus to others—particularly if they are able, as in the case of the columnist, to fall back upon outside contributors in their intervals of pessimism or sloth.
There are several criticisms of American newspapers, but many of those complaints fade when you think about how they occasionally produce a writer like Don Marquis. The frantic pace, pressure, and urgency of the newspaper routine, which can be intolerable for some, actually energizes others—especially those like columnists who can rely on outside contributors during their moments of doubt or laziness.
Mr. Marquis's The Old Soak, a post-prohibition portrait of a genial old tippler, is perhaps the most vital bit of American humor since Mr. Dooley—some say since Mark Twain. His Prefaces and his poems will also be considered by the judicious. He was born in Illinois in 1878, and did newspaper work in Philadelphia and Atlanta before coming to the Sun in 1912.
Mr. Marquis's The Old Soak, a post-prohibition portrayal of a friendly old drinker, is possibly the most significant piece of American humor since Mr. Dooley—some even say since Mark Twain. His Prefaces and his poems will also be evaluated by thoughtful readers. He was born in Illinois in 1878 and worked in newspapers in Philadelphia and Atlanta before joining the Sun in 1912.
I
No matter how nearly perfect an Almost Perfect State may be, it is not nearly enough perfect unless the individuals who compose it can, somewhere between death and birth, have a perfectly corking time for a few years. The most wonderful governmental system in the world does not attract us, as a system; we are after a system that scarcely knows it is a system; the great thing is to have the largest number of individuals as happy as may be, for a little while at least, some time before they die.
No matter how close to perfect an Almost Perfect State is, it’s still not good enough unless the people who make it up can have an amazing time for a few years somewhere between being born and dying. The best government system in the world doesn’t draw us in as a system; we're looking for a system that hardly realizes it's a system. The main goal is to have as many people as possible feeling happy, even if it’s just for a short time before they pass away.
Infancy is not what it is cracked up to be. The child seems happy all the time to the adult, because the adult knows that the child is untouched by the real problems of life; if the adult were similarly untouched he is sure that he would be happy. But children, not knowing that they are having an easy time, have a good many hard times. Growing and learning and obeying the rules of their elders, or fighting against them, are not easy things to do. Adolescence is certainly far from a uniformly pleasant period. Early manhood might be the most glorious time of all were it not that the sheer excess of life and vigor gets a fellow into continual scrapes. Of middle age the best that can be said is that a middle aged person has likely learned how to have a little fun in spite of his troubles.
Infancy isn’t as great as people make it out to be. To adults, the child seems happy all the time because they know the child is shielded from the real problems of life; if they were in the same position, they believe they would be happy too. But kids, not realizing that they have it easier, actually go through quite a few tough times. Growing up, learning, and following their elders' rules—or pushing back against them—aren’t easy tasks. Adolescence is definitely not just a smooth, enjoyable phase. Early adulthood could be the most exciting time of all if it weren’t for all the wild energy getting someone into constant trouble. As for middle age, the best thing that can be said is that a middle-aged person has probably figured out how to have some fun despite their issues.
It is to old age that we look for reimbursement, the most of us. And most of us look in vain. For the most of us have been wrenched and racked, in one way or another, until old age is the most trying time of all.
It’s to old age that we seek compensation, for the majority of us. And most of us search in vain. Because most of us have been pulled and tormented, in one way or another, until old age becomes the hardest time of all.
Personally we look forward to an old age of dissipation and indolence and unreverend disrepute. In fifty years we shall be ninety-two years old. We intend to work rather hard during those fifty years and accumulate enough to live on without working any more for the next ten years, for we have determined to die at the age of one hundred and two.
Personally, we’re looking forward to an old age of indulgence, laziness, and a bit of scandal. In fifty years, we’ll be ninety-two. We plan to work quite hard during those fifty years and save up enough to live on without working for the next ten years, because we’ve decided to live until one hundred and two.
During the last ten years we shall indulge ourself in many things that we have been forced by circumstances to forego. We have always been compelled, and we shall be compelled for many years to come, to be prudent, cautious, staid, sober, conservative, industrious, respectful of established institutions, a model citizen. We have not liked it, but we have been unable to escape it. Our mind, our logical faculties, our observation, inform us that the conservatives have the right side of the argument in all human affairs. But the people whom we really prefer as associates, though we do not approve their ideas, are the rebels, the radicals, the wastrels, the vicious, the poets, the Bolshevists, the idealists, the nuts, the Lucifers, the agreeable good-for-nothings, the sentimentalists, the prophets, the freaks. We have never dared to know any of them, far less become intimate with them.
Over the last ten years, we’ve allowed ourselves to enjoy many things we've had to give up due to circumstances. We’ve always had to be careful, cautious, serious, responsible, conservative, hardworking, and respectful of established institutions—basically, a model citizen. We haven't liked it, but we couldn't avoid it. Our minds, our logic, and our observations tell us that conservatives have the correct perspective in all human matters. However, the people we really prefer to be around, even if we don’t agree with their views, are the rebels, the radicals, the misfits, the reckless, the poets, the Bolsheviks, the idealists, the weirdos, the troublemakers, the charming good-for-nothings, the sentimentalists, the visionaries, the eccentrics. We've never dared to really know any of them, let alone get close to them.
Between the years of ninety-two and a hundred and two, however, we shall be the ribald, useless, drunken outcast person we have always wished to be. We shall have a long white beard and long white hair; we shall not walk at all, but recline in a wheel chair and bellow for alcoholic beverages; in the winter we shall sit before the fire with our feet in a bucket of hot water, with a decanter of corn whiskey near at hand, and write ribald songs against organized society; strapped to one arm of our chair will be a forty-five caliber revolver, and we shall shoot out the lights when we want to go to sleep, instead of turning them off; when we want air we shall throw a silver candlestick through the front window and be damned to it; we shall address public meetings to which we have been invited because of our wisdom in a vein of jocund malice. We shall ... but we don't wish to make any one envious of the good time that is coming to us ... we look forward to a disreputable, vigorous, unhonored and disorderly old age.
Between the years of ninety-two and a hundred and two, however, we will be the wild, useless, drunk outcast we’ve always wanted to be. We will have a long white beard and long white hair; we won’t walk at all, but will recline in a wheelchair and shout for alcoholic drinks; in the winter, we’ll sit by the fire with our feet in a bucket of hot water, a bottle of corn whiskey within reach, and write crude songs against organized society; strapped to one arm of our chair will be a .45 caliber revolver, and we’ll shoot out the lights when we want to sleep instead of turning them off; when we want fresh air, we’ll throw a silver candlestick through the front window and not care about it; we’ll speak at public meetings that we were invited to because of our wisdom, with a tone of cheerful mischief. We will... but we don’t want to make anyone jealous of the good times ahead of us... we look forward to a disreputable, vigorous, unhonored, and disorderly old age.
(In the meantime, of course, you understand, you can't have us pinched and deported for our yearnings.)
(In the meantime, of course, you understand, you can't have us arrested and deported for our desires.)
We shall know that the Almost Perfect State is here when the kind of old age each person wants is possible to him. Of course, all of you may not want the kind we want ... some of you may prefer prunes and morality to the bitter end. Some of you may be dissolute now and may look forward to becoming like one of the nice old fellows in a Wordsworth poem. But for our part we have always been a hypocrite and we shall have to continue being a hypocrite for a good many years yet, and we yearn to come out in our true colors at last. The point is, that no matter what you want to be, during those last ten years, that you may be, in the Almost Perfect State.
We’ll know the Almost Perfect State has arrived when everyone can choose the kind of old age they desire. Of course, not all of you will want what we want... some of you might prefer a quiet, morally upright life to facing the end head-on. Some of you may be living it up now and might dream of becoming like one of those charming old characters in a Wordsworth poem. But we’ve always been hypocritical, and we’ll likely continue that way for quite a while, yearning to show our true selves at last. The key point is that no matter what you wish to become in those final ten years, you can be that as part of the Almost Perfect State.
Any system of government under which the individual does all the sacrificing for the sake of the general good, for the sake of the community, the State, gets off on its wrong foot. We don't want things that cost us too much. We don't want too much strain all the time.
Any system of government where the individual makes all the sacrifices for the greater good, for the community or the State, is starting off on the wrong foot. We don’t want things that are too costly. We don’t want constant pressure all the time.
The best good that you can possibly achieve is not good enough if you have to strain yourself all the time to reach it. A thing is only worth doing, and doing again and again, if you can do it rather easily, and get some joy out of it.
The best good you can achieve isn’t worth it if you have to constantly struggle to get there. Something is only worth doing, and doing repeatedly, if you can manage it with relative ease and find some joy in it.
Do the best you can, without straining yourself too much and too continuously, and leave the rest to God. If you strain yourself too much you'll have to ask God to patch you up. And for all you know, patching you up may take time that it was planned to use some other way.
Do your best without overdoing it or pushing yourself too hard, and leave the rest to God. If you push too much, you'll need to ask God to help you recover. And who knows, that recovery might take time that was supposed to be spent elsewhere.
BUT ... overstrain yourself now and then. For this reason: The things you create easily and joyously will not continue to come easily and joyously unless you yourself are getting bigger all the time. And when you overstrain yourself you are assisting in the creation of a new self—if you get what we mean. And if you should ask us suddenly just what this has to do with the picture of the old guy in the wheel chair we should answer: Hanged if we know, but we seemed to sort o' run into it, somehow.
BUT ... push yourself once in a while. Here's why: The things you create easily and happily won't keep coming to you that way unless you are constantly growing. When you push yourself, you're helping to create a new version of yourself—if you catch our drift. And if you were to ask us right now what this has to do with the image of the old guy in the wheelchair, we'd say: Beats us, but it somehow seemed to connect.
II
Interplanetary communication is one of the persistent dreams of the inhabitants of this oblate spheroid on which we move, breathe and suffer for lack of beer. There seems to be a feeling in many quarters that if we could get speech with the Martians, let us say, we might learn from them something to our advantage. There is a disposition to concede the superiority of the fellows Out There ... just as some Americans capitulate without a struggle to poets from England, rugs from Constantinople, song and sausage from Germany, religious enthusiasts from Hindustan and cheese from Switzerland, although they have not tested the goods offered and really lack the discrimination to determine their quality. Almost the only foreign importations that were ever sneezed at in this country were Swedish matches and Spanish influenza.
Interplanetary communication is one of the ongoing dreams of the people living on this round planet where we move, breathe, and suffer because we can't find good beer. Many seem to think that if we could talk to Martians, we might learn something beneficial from them. There’s a tendency to believe that those beings out there are superior... just like some Americans tend to accept poets from England, rugs from Istanbul, sausage and music from Germany, fervent believers from India, and cheese from Switzerland without questioning it, even though they haven't really tried these things and don't have the judgment to assess their value. The only foreign imports that have ever been frowned upon in this country were Swedish matches and Spanish influenza.
But are the Martians ... if Martians there be ... any more capable than the persons dwelling between the Woolworth Building and the Golden Horn, between Shwe Dagon and the First Church, Scientist, in Boston, Mass.? Perhaps the Martians yearn toward earth, romantically, poetically, the Romeos swearing by its light to the Juliets; the idealists and philosophers fabling that already there exists upon it an ALMOST PERFECT STATE—and now and then a wan prophet lifting his heart to its gleams, as a cup to be filled from Heaven with fresh waters of hope and courage. For this earth, it is also a star.
But are the Martians ... if there are Martians ... any more capable than the people living between the Woolworth Building and the Golden Horn, between Shwe Dagon and the First Church of Christ, Scientist, in Boston, Mass.? Maybe the Martians dream of Earth, romantically, poetically, like Romeos swearing by its light to their Juliets; the idealists and philosophers imagining that there already exists on it an ALMOST PERFECT STATE—and now and then a weary prophet lifting his heart to its light, like a cup waiting to be filled from Heaven with fresh waters of hope and courage. For this Earth is also a star.
We know they are wrong about us, the lovers in the far stars, the philosophers, poets, the prophets ... or are they wrong?
We know they are wrong about us, the lovers in the distant stars, the philosophers, poets, the prophets ... or are they wrong?
They are both right and wrong, as we are probably both right and wrong about them. If we tumbled into Mars or Arcturus or Sirius this evening we should find the people there discussing the shimmy, the jazz, the inconstancy of cooks and the iniquity of retail butchers, no doubt ... and they would be equally disappointed by the way we flitter, frivol, flutter and flivver.
They’re both right and wrong, just like we’re probably right and wrong about them. If we suddenly landed on Mars, Arcturus, or Sirius tonight, we’d probably find the people there talking about the shimmy, jazz, the unpredictability of cooks, and the unfairness of retail butchers, for sure... and they would be just as disappointed by how we flit, frivol, flutter, and flivver.
And yet, that other thing would be there too ... that thing that made them look at our star as a symbol of grace and beauty.
And yet, that other thing would be there too... that thing that made them see our star as a symbol of grace and beauty.
Men could not think of THE ALMOST PERFECT STATE if they did not have it in them ultimately to create THE ALMOST PERFECT STATE.
Men couldn't conceive of THE ALMOST PERFECT STATE unless they ultimately had the ability to create THE ALMOST PERFECT STATE within themselves.
We used sometimes to walk over the Brooklyn Bridge, that song in stone and steel of an engineer who was also a great artist, at dusk, when the tides of shadow flood in from the lower bay to break in a surf of glory and mystery and illusion against the tall towers of Manhattan. Seen from the middle arch of the bridge at twilight, New York with its girdle of shifting waters and its drift of purple cloud and its quick pulsations of unstable light is a miracle of splendor and beauty that lights up the heart like the laughter of a god.
We would sometimes walk over the Brooklyn Bridge, that song in stone and steel created by an engineer who was also a great artist, at dusk, when the shadows flood in from the lower bay to crash in a surf of glory, mystery, and illusion against the tall towers of Manhattan. From the middle arch of the bridge at twilight, New York, with its band of shifting waters, drifting purple clouds, and flickering unstable light, is a miracle of splendor and beauty that brightens the heart like the laughter of a god.
But, descend. Go down into the city. Mingle with the details. The dirty old shed from which the "L" trains and trolleys put out with their jammed and mangled thousands for flattest Flatbush and the unknown bourne of ulterior Brooklyn is still the same dirty old shed; on a hot, damp night the pasty streets stink like a paperhanger's overalls; you are trodden and over-ridden by greasy little profiteers and their hopping victims; you are encompassed round about by the ugly and the sordid, and the objectionable is exuded upon you from a myriad candid pores; your elation and your illusion vanish like ingenuous snowflakes that have kissed a hot dog sandwich on its fiery brow, and you say: "Beauty? Aw, h—l! What's the use?"
But, go down. Enter the city. Get lost in the details. The rundown old shed where the "L" trains and trolleys unload their jam-packed, battered crowds for the flat expanse of Flatbush and the unknown parts of Brooklyn is still the same old rundown shed; on a hot, humid night, the grimy streets smell like a paperhanger's overalls; you are pushed around by greedy little hustlers and their desperate victims; you are surrounded by the ugly and the grimy, and unpleasantness seeps into you from countless open pores; your excitement and your fantasies melt away like innocent snowflakes that have touched a hot dog sandwich on its fiery surface, and you think: "Beauty? Oh, what’s the point?"
And yet you have seen beauty. And beauty that was created by these people and people like these.... You have seen the tall towers of Manhattan, wonderful under the stars. How did it come about that such growths came from such soil—that a breed lawless and sordid and prosaic has written such a mighty hieroglyphic against the sky? This glamor out of a pigsty ... how come? How is it that this hideous, half-brute city is also beautiful and a fit habitation for demi-gods? How come?
And yet you have seen beauty. And beauty that was created by these people and people like them.... You have seen the tall towers of Manhattan, stunning under the stars. How did it happen that such growth came from such soil—that a breed that is lawless, sordid, and ordinary has written such a powerful symbol against the sky? This glamour out of a pigsty ... how did that happen? How is it that this ugly, rough city is also beautiful and a suitable home for demigods? How did that happen?
It comes about because the wise and subtle deities permit nothing worthy to be lost. It was with no thought of beauty that the builders labored; no conscious thought; they were masters or slaves in the bitter wars of commerce, and they never saw as a whole what they were making; no one of them did. But each one had had his dream. And the baffled dreams and the broken visions and the ruined hopes and the secret desires of each one labored with him as he labored; the things that were lost and beaten and trampled down went into the stone and steel and gave it soul; the aspiration denied and the hope abandoned and the vision defeated were the things that lived, and not the apparent purpose for which each one of all the millions sweat and toiled or cheated; the hidden things, the silent things, the winged things, so weak they are easily killed, the unacknowledged things, the rejected beauty, the strangled appreciation, the inchoate art, the submerged spirit—these groped and found each other and gathered themselves together and worked themselves into the tiles and mortar of the edifice and made a town that is a worthy fellow of the sunrise and the sea winds.
It happens because the wise and subtle gods don’t let anything valuable be lost. The builders worked without thinking about beauty; they weren’t consciously aware of it. They were either masters or workers caught in the harsh struggles of business and never saw the full picture of what they were creating; none of them did. But each had their own dream. The frustrated dreams, shattered visions, lost hopes, and hidden desires of each one pushed alongside them as they worked; the things that were lost, beaten down, and trampled fed into the concrete and steel, giving it life. The denied aspirations, abandoned hopes, and defeated visions were what truly thrived, not the obvious goals for which millions labored, sweated, or cheated. The hidden things, the quiet things, the fragile things, so weak they can easily be destroyed, the unrecognized things, the overlooked beauty, the stifled appreciation, the emerging art, the buried spirit—these reached out and found one another and came together, weaving themselves into the tiles and mortar of the building, creating a town that stands proudly beside the sunrise and the sea winds.
Humanity triumphs over its details.
Humanity conquers its challenges.
The individual aspiration is always defeated of its perfect fruition and expression, but it is never lost; it passes into the conglomerate being of the race.
Individual dreams may never fully achieve their ideal form or expression, but they are never truly lost; they become part of the collective existence of humanity.
The way to encourage yourself about the human race is to look at it first from a distance; look at the lights on the high spots. Coming closer, you will be profoundly discouraged at the number of low spots, not to say two-spots. Coming still closer, you will become discouraged once more by the reflection that the same stuff that is in the high spots is also in the two-spots.
The best way to boost your confidence in humanity is to first observe it from afar; focus on the bright spots. As you get closer, you'll likely feel a sense of disappointment at the number of dark spots, not to mention the truly low points. Getting even closer, you'll find yourself disheartened again by the realization that the same qualities found in the bright spots are also present in the dark ones.
"THE MAN-O'-WAR'S 'ER 'USBAND"
By David W. Bone
Those who understand something of a sailor's feeling for his ship will appreciate the restraint with which Captain Bone describes the loss of the Cameronia, his command, torpedoed in the Mediterranean during the War. You will notice (forgive us for pointing out these things) how quietly the quoted title pays tribute to the gallantry of the destroyers that stood by the sinking ship; and the heroism of the chief officer's death is not less moving because told in two sentences. This superb picture of a sea tragedy is taken from Merchantmen-at-Arms, a history of the British Merchants' Service during the War; a book of enthralling power and truth, illustrated by the author's brother, Muirhead Bone, one of the greatest of living etchers.
Those who understand a sailor's connection to his ship will appreciate how restrained Captain Bone is in describing the loss of the Cameronia, his command, which was torpedoed in the Mediterranean during the War. You'll notice (sorry for pointing this out) how quietly the quoted title honors the bravery of the destroyers that stayed with the sinking ship; and the heroism of the chief officer's death is just as impactful even though it's told in just two sentences. This incredible depiction of a maritime tragedy is pulled from Merchantmen-at-Arms, a history of the British Merchants' Service during the War; it’s a book with captivating power and authenticity, illustrated by the author’s brother, Muirhead Bone, one of the greatest living etchers.
David William Bone was born in Partick (near Glasgow) in 1873; his father was a well-known Glasgow journalist; his great-grandfather was a boyhood companion of Robert Burns. Bone went to sea as an apprentice in the City of Florence, an old-time square-rigger, at the age of fifteen; he has been at sea ever since. He is now master of S.S. Columbia of the Anchor Line, a well-known ship in New York Harbor, as she has carried passengers between the Clyde and the Hudson for more than twenty years. Captain Bone's fine sea tale, The Brass-bounder, published in 1910, has become a classic of the square-sail era; his Broken Stowage (1915) is a collection of shorter sea sketches. In the long roll of great writers who have reflected the simplicity and severity of sea life, Captain Bone will take a permanent and honorable place.
David William Bone was born in Partick (near Glasgow) in 1873. His father was a well-known journalist from Glasgow, and his great-grandfather was a childhood friend of Robert Burns. Bone went to sea as an apprentice on the City of Florence, an old square-rigger, at the age of fifteen, and he has been at sea ever since. He is now the captain of the S.S. Columbia of the Anchor Line, a well-known ship in New York Harbor that has carried passengers between the Clyde and the Hudson for over twenty years. Captain Bone's impressive sea story, The Brass-bounder, published in 1910, has become a classic of the square-sail era. His book Broken Stowage (1915) is a collection of shorter sea sketches. Among the great writers who have captured the simplicity and harshness of sea life, Captain Bone will hold a permanent and respected place.
A SENSE of security is difficult of definition. Largely, it is founded upon habit and association. It is induced and maintained by familiar surroundings. On board ship, in a small world of our own, we seem to be contained by the boundaries of the bulwarks, to be sailing beyond the influences of the land and of other ships. The sea is the same we have known for so long. Every item of our ship fitment—the trim arrangement of the decks, the set and rake of mast and funnel, even the furnishings of our cabins—has the power of impressing a stable feeling of custom, normal ship life, safety. It requires an effort of thought to recall that in their homely presence we are endangered. Relating his experiences after having been mined and his ship sunk, a master confided that the point that impressed him most deeply was when he went to his room for the confidential papers and saw the cabin exactly in everyday aspect—his longshore clothes suspended from the hooks, his umbrella standing in a corner as he had placed it on coming aboard.
A SENSE of security is hard to define. It mostly comes from habit and association. It’s created and kept by familiar surroundings. Onboard a ship, in our own little world, we feel enclosed by the boundaries of the walls, sailing away from the influences of the land and other vessels. The sea is the same one we've known for so long. Every part of our ship—the layout of the decks, the angle of the mast and funnel, even the furnishings in our cabins—gives us a strong sense of routine, normal ship life, and safety. It takes some effort to remember that we are actually in danger despite their comforting presence. Sharing his experiences after his ship was mined and sunk, a captain revealed that what struck him the most was when he went to his room for important papers and saw the cabin looking just as usual—his shore clothes hanging from the hooks, his umbrella standing in a corner just as he had left it when boarding.
Soldiers on service are denied this aid to assurance. Unlike us, they cannot carry their home with them to the battlefields. All their scenes and surroundings are novel; they may only draw a reliance and comfort from the familiar presence of their comrades. At sea in a ship there is a yet greater incitement to their disquiet. The movement, the limitless sea, the distance from the land, cannot be ignored. The atmosphere that is so familiar and comforting to us, is to many of them an environment of dread possibilities.
Soldiers on duty are deprived of this reassurance. Unlike us, they can’t take a piece of home with them to the combat zones. Everything around them is new; they can only find some reliance and comfort in the familiar presence of their fellow soldiers. At sea on a ship, their anxiety is even more heightened. The motion, the endless ocean, the distance from shore, is impossible to overlook. The atmosphere that feels so familiar and comforting to us is, for many of them, a place full of frightening possibilities.
It is with some small measure of this sense of security—tempered by our knowledge of enemy activity in these waters—we pace the bridge. Anxiety is not wholly absent. Some hours past, we saw small flotsam that may have come from the decks of a French mail steamer, torpedoed three days ago. The passing of the derelict fittings aroused some disquiet, but the steady routine of our progress and the constant friendly presence of familiar surroundings has effect in allaying immediate fears. The rounds of the bridge go on—the writing of the log, the tapping of the glass, the small measures that mark the passing of our sea-hours. Two days out from Marseilles—and all well! In another two days we should be approaching the Canal, and then—to be clear of 'submarine waters' for a term. Fine weather! A light wind and sea accompany us for the present, but the filmy glare of the sun, now low, and a backward movement of the glass foretells a break ere long. We are steaming at high speed to make the most of the smooth sea. Ahead, on each bow, our two escorting destroyers conform to the angles of our zigzag—spurring out and swerving with the peculiar "thrown-around" movement of their class. Look-out is alert and in numbers. Added to the watch of the ship's crew, military signalers are posted; the boats swung outboard have each a party of troops on guard.
With a bit of this feeling of safety—tempered by our awareness of enemy activity in these waters—we walk the bridge. Anxiety isn't completely gone. A few hours ago, we spotted some debris that might have come from a French mail steamer that was torpedoed three days back. The sight of the abandoned wreckage caused some unease, but the steady routine of our journey and the constant friendly presence of familiar surroundings help ease immediate fears. The activities on the bridge continue—the log is being written, the glass is being tapped, and the small tasks mark the passing of our sea hours. Two days out from Marseilles—and everything's fine! In another two days, we should be approaching the Canal, and then—we’ll be free of 'submarine waters' for a while. The weather is nice! A light wind and calm sea are with us for now, but the hazy glare of the low sun, along with a drop in the barometer, suggests a change of weather is coming soon. We're traveling at high speed to take advantage of the smooth sea. Ahead, on either side, our two escorting destroyers keep up with our zigzag course—darting out and swerving with their typical "thrown-around" movement. The lookout is alert and plentiful. In addition to the ship's crew on watch, military signalers are stationed; the boats lowered overboard each have a group of troops on guard.
The upthrow comes swiftly on the moment of impact. Hatches, coal, a huge column of solid water go skyward in a hurtling mass to fall in torrent on the bridge. Part of a human body strikes the awning spars and hangs—watch-keepers are borne to the deck by the weight of water—the steersman falls limply over the wheel with blood pouring from a gash on his forehead.... Then silence for a stunned half-minute, with only the thrust of the engines marking the heartbeats of the stricken ship.
The upthrow happens quickly at the moment of impact. Hatches, coal, and a huge column of solid water shoot up into the air in a chaotic mass, then crash down in a deluge onto the bridge. Part of a human body hits the awning beams and gets stuck—watchkeepers are knocked to the deck by the force of the water—the steersman collapses over the wheel with blood streaming from a cut on his forehead.... Then there’s silence for a shocked half-minute, with only the sound of the engines beating out the heartbeats of the damaged ship.
Uproar! Most of our men are young recruits: they have been but two days on the sea. The torpedo has gone hard home at the very weakest hour of our calculated drill. The troops are at their evening meal when the blow comes, the explosion killing many outright. We had counted on a proportion of the troops being on the deck, a steadying number to balance the sudden rush from below that we foresaw in emergency. Hurrying from the mess-decks as enjoined, the quick movement gathers way and intensity: the decks become jammed by the pressure, the gangways and passages are blocked in the struggle. There is the making of a panic—tuned by their outcry, "God! O God! O Christ!" The swelling murmur is neither excited nor agonized—rather the dull, hopeless expression of despair.
Uproar! Most of our men are young recruits: they’ve only been at sea for two days. The torpedo hit us hard during the weakest point of our planned drill. The troops were having their evening meal when the explosion struck, killing many instantly. We had expected a portion of the troops to be on deck, providing a stable number to counter the sudden rush from below that we anticipated in an emergency. As they hurry from the mess decks as instructed, the fast movement builds momentum and intensity: the decks become crowded with the pressure, and the gangways and passages are blocked in the chaos. Panic is starting to set in—echoed by their cries, "God! O God! O Christ!" The rising sound is neither frantic nor anguished—more like a dull, hopeless expression of despair.
The officer commanding troops has come on the bridge at the first alarm. His juniors have opportunity to take their stations before the struggling mass reaches to the boats. The impossibility of getting among the men on the lower decks makes the military officers' efforts to restore confidence difficult. They are aided from an unexpected quarter. The bridge-boy makes unofficial use of our megaphone. "Hey! Steady up you men doon therr," he shouts. "Ye'll no' dae ony guid fur yersels croodin' th' ledders!"
The officer in charge of the troops has arrived at the bridge at the first alarm. His subordinates have the chance to take their positions before the struggling crowd reaches the boats. The difficulty of getting among the men on the lower decks makes it hard for the military officers to restore confidence. They get help from an unexpected source. The bridge-boy takes it upon himself to use our megaphone. "Hey! Steady up, you guys down there," he shouts. "You won't do yourselves any good crowding the ladders!"
We could not have done it as well. The lad is plainly in sight to the crowd on the decks. A small boy, undersized. "Steady up doon therr!" The effect is instant. Noise there still is, but the movement is arrested.
We couldn't have done it as well. The kid is clearly visible to the crowd on the decks. A small boy, on the smaller side. "Hold steady up there!" The impact is immediate. There's still noise, but the movement has stopped.
The engines are stopped—we are now beyond range of a second torpedo—and steam thunders in exhaust, making our efforts to control movements by voice impossible. At the moment of the impact the destroyers have swung round and are casting here and there like hounds on the scent: the dull explosion of a depth-charge—then another, rouses a fierce hope that we are not unavenged. The force of the explosion has broken connections to the wireless room, but the aerial still holds and, when a measure of order on the boatdeck allows, we send a message of our peril broadcast. There is no doubt in our minds of the outcome. Our bows, drooping visibly, tell that we shall not float long. We have nearly three thousand on board. There are boats for sixteen hundred—then rafts. Boats—rafts—and the glass is falling at a rate that shows bad weather over the western horizon!
The engines are off—we’re out of range of a second torpedo—and steam is roaring in exhaust, making it impossible for us to control movements by voice. When the impact happened, the destroyers turned around and are moving about like hounds on a scent: the dull boom of a depth charge—then another—sparks a fierce hope that we haven't gone unavenged. The force of the explosion has cut off communications to the wireless room, but the aerial is still intact, and when there's a bit of order on the boat deck, we send out a distress message. We have no doubt about the outcome. Our bows, sagging noticeably, show us that we won't stay afloat for long. We have nearly three thousand people on board. There are lifeboats for sixteen hundred—then rafts. Lifeboats—rafts—and the barometer is dropping at a rate that signals bad weather over the western horizon!
Our drill, that provided for lowering the boats with only half-complements in them, will not serve. We pass orders to lower away in any condition, however overcrowded. The way is off the ship, and it is with some apprehension we watch the packed boats that drop away from the davit heads. The shrill ring of the block-sheaves indicates a tension that is not far from breaking-point. Many of the life-boats reach the water safely with their heavy burdens, but the strain on the tackles—far beyond their working load—is too great for all to stand to it. Two boats go down by the run. The men in them are thrown violently to the water, where they float in the wash and shattered planking. A third dangles from the after fall, having shot her manning out at parting of the forward tackle. Lowered by the stern, she rights, disengages, and drifts aft with the men clinging to the life-lines. We can make no attempt to reach the men in the water. Their life-belts are sufficient to keep them afloat: the ship is going down rapidly by the head, and there remains the second line of boats to be hoisted and swung over. The chief officer, pausing in his quick work, looks to the bridge inquiringly, as though to ask, "How long?" The fingers of two hands suffice to mark our estimate.
Our drill, which was designed to lower the boats with only half the number of people in them, isn't working. We give the orders to lower the boats regardless of how crowded they are. The path is off the ship, and with some concern, we watch the packed boats drop away from the davit heads. The sharp sound of the pulleys indicates a tension that is close to breaking. Many of the lifeboats make it to the water safely with their heavy loads, but the pressure on the tackle—well beyond what it's supposed to handle—is too much for all of them. Two boats fall uncontrollably. The men in them are thrown violently into the water, where they float among the waves and broken planks. A third boat hangs from the back line, having lost its crew when the forward tackle broke. Lowered by the stern, it rights itself, breaks free, and drifts backward with the men hanging onto the life-lines. We can't try to reach the men in the water. Their life jackets are enough to keep them afloat; the ship is sinking quickly at the bow, and we still have the second line of boats to lift and swing out. The chief officer, pausing in his rapid work, looks toward the bridge, as if to ask, "How long?" The fingers of two hands are enough to indicate our estimate.
The decks are now angled to the deepening pitch of the bows. Pumps are utterly inadequate to make impression on the swift inflow. The chief engineer comes to the bridge with a hopeless report. It is only a question of time. How long? Already the water is lapping at a level of the foredeck. Troops massed there and on the forecastle-head are apprehensive: it is indeed a wonder that their officers have held them for so long. The commanding officer sets example by a cool nonchalance that we envy. Posted with us on the bridge, his quick eyes note the flood surging in the pent 'tween-decks below, from which his men have removed the few wounded. The dead are left to the sea.
The decks are now tilted as the bow sinks deeper. The pumps can't keep up with the fast inflow of water. The chief engineer comes to the bridge with grim news. It's just a matter of time. How much time? The water is already lapping at the level of the foredeck. The troops gathered there and on the forecastle-head are anxious: it’s surprising that their officers have managed to keep them calm for so long. The commanding officer leads by example, showing a calmness we envy. Standing with us on the bridge, his sharp eyes take in the flood rushing into the space below decks, where his men have moved out the few wounded. The dead, unfortunately, are left to the sea.
Help comes as we had expected it would. Leaving Nemesis to steam fast circles round the sinking ship, Rifleman swings in and brings up alongside at the forward end. Even in our fear and anxiety and distress, we cannot but admire the precision of the destroyer captain's manœuver—the skilful avoidance of our crowded life-boats and the men in the water—the sudden stoppage of her way and the cant that brings her to a standstill at the lip of our brimming decks. The troops who have stood so well to orders have their reward in an easy leap to safety. Quickly the foredeck is cleared. Rifleman spurts ahead in a rush that sets the surrounding life-boats to eddy in her wash. She takes up the circling high-speed patrol and allows her sister ship to swing in and embark a number of our men.
Help arrives just as we expected it would. Leaving Nemesis to make fast circles around the sinking ship, Rifleman comes in and positions itself alongside at the front end. Even in our fear and distress, we can't help but admire the precision of the destroyer captain's maneuver—the skillful avoidance of our crowded life-boats and the men in the water—the sudden stop and angle that bring her to a halt at the edge of our overflowing decks. The troops who have followed orders so well are rewarded with an easy leap to safety. Quickly, the foredeck is cleared. Rifleman speeds ahead in a rush that sends the surrounding life-boats swirling in her wake. She resumes the circling high-speed patrol and lets her sister ship come in to take on a number of our men.
It is when the most of the life-boats are gone we realize fully the gallant service of the destroyers. There remain the rafts, but many of these have been launched over to aid the struggling men in the water. Half an hour has passed since we were struck—thirty minutes of frantic endeavor to debark our men—yet still the decks are thronged by a packed mass that seems but little reduced. The coming of the destroyers alters the outlook. Rifleman's action has taken over six hundred. A sensible clearance! Nemesis swings in with the precision of an express, and the thud and clatter of the troops jumping to her deck sets up a continuous drumming note of deliverance. Alert and confident, the naval men accept the great risks of their position. The ship's bows are entered to the water at a steep incline. Every minute the balance is weighing, casting her stern high in the air. The bulkheads are by now taking place of keel and bearing the huge weight of her on the water. At any moment she may go without a warning, to crash into the light hull of the destroyer and bear her down. For all the circling watch of her sister ship, the submarine—if still he lives—may get in a shot at the standing target. It is with a deep relief we signal the captain to bear off. Her decks are jammed to the limit. She can carry no more. Nemesis lists heavily under her burdened decks as she goes ahead and clears.
It’s only when most of the lifeboats are gone that we truly appreciate the brave efforts of the destroyers. There are still some rafts, but many have been deployed to help the struggling men in the water. Half an hour has passed since we were hit—thirty minutes of frantic effort to evacuate our men—yet the decks are still crowded with a packed mass that seems barely smaller. The arrival of the destroyers changes everything. Rifleman's action has taken over six hundred. A significant clearance! Nemesis maneuvers in with the precision of a high-speed train, and the sound of troops jumping onto her deck creates a constant rhythm of relief. Alert and confident, the naval crew embraces the significant risks of their position. The ship's bow is angled steeply into the water. Every minute the balance shifts, raising her stern high into the air. The bulkheads are now taking the place of the keel, supporting the heavy weight of the ship in the water. At any moment, she could go down without warning, crashing into the light hull of the destroyer and dragging her down as well. Despite the watchful eye of her sister ship, the submarine—if it still exists—may take a shot at the exposed target. We signal the captain to move away with a deep sense of relief. Her decks are jam-packed. She can't hold any more. Nemesis tilts heavily under her overloaded decks as she pushes forward and sails clear.
Forty minutes! The zigzag clock in the wheelhouse goes on ringing the angles of time and course as though we were yet under helm and speed. For a short term we have noted that the ship appears to have reached a point of arrest in her foundering droop. She remains upright as she has been since righting herself after the first inrush of water. Like the lady she always was, she has added no fearsome list to the sum of our distress. The familiar bridge, on which so many of our safe sea-days have been spent, is canted at an angle that makes foothold uneasy. She cannot remain for long afloat. The end will come swiftly, without warning—a sudden rupture of the bulkhead that is sustaining her weight. We are not now many left on board. Striving and wrenching to man-handle the only remaining boat—rendered idle for want of the tackles that have parted on service of its twin—we succeed in pointing her outboard, and await a further deepening of the bows ere launching her. Of the military, the officer commanding, some few of his juniors, a group of other ranks, stand by. The senior officers of the ship, a muster of seamen, a few stewards, are banded with us at the last. We expect no further service of the destroyers. The position of the ship is over-menacing to any approach. They have all they can carry. Steaming at a short distance they have the appearance of being heavily overloaded; each has a staggering list and lies low in the water under their deck encumbrance. We have only the hazard of a quick out-throw of the remaining boat and the chances of a grip on floating wreckage to count upon.
Forty minutes! The zigzag clock in the wheelhouse keeps ringing the time and direction as if we were still in control and moving fast. For a brief moment, it seems like the ship has stabilized in her sinking. She’s still upright, just like after she righted herself from the first rush of water. True to her nature, she hasn’t tipped dangerously, adding to our worries. The familiar bridge, where we spent so many safe days at sea, is tilted, making it hard to keep our footing. She can’t stay afloat for much longer. The end will come quickly and unexpectedly—a sudden break in the bulkhead that’s holding her up. There aren't many of us left on board. We are struggling to manually maneuver the only remaining boat, which is useless without the tackling that has broken on its twin. We manage to point it outwards, waiting for the bow to sink deeper before we launch it. Among us are some military personnel, the commanding officer, a few of his juniors, and a group of others in various ranks. The senior officers, a group of seamen, and a few stewards are with us in the end. We don't expect any more help from the destroyers. The ship’s position is too dangerous for any approach. They are all maxed out with what they can carry. At a distance, they look heavily overloaded; each has a noticeable tilt and is low in the water under the weight. We only have the chance to quickly launch the remaining boat and hope for a grip on floating debris.
On a sudden swift sheer, Rifleman takes the risk. Unheeding our warning hail, she steams across the bows and backs at a high speed: her rounded stern jars on our hull plates, a whaler and the davits catch on a projection and give with the ring of buckling steel—she turns on the throw of the propellers and closes aboard with a resounding impact that sets her living deck-load to stagger.
On a sudden sharp turn, Rifleman takes the risk. Ignoring our warning calls, she speeds across our bow and backs up quickly: her curved stern slams into our hull, causing a whaler and the davits to get caught on a projection and bend with the sound of buckling steel—she spins around with the force of the propellers and comes alongside with a loud crash that makes her deck-load sway.
We lose no time. Scrambling down the life-ropes, our small company endeavors to get foothold on her decks. The destroyer widens off at the rebound, but by clutch of friendly hands the men are dragged aboard. One fails to reach safety. A soldier loses grip and goes to the water. The chief officer follows him. Tired and unstrung as he must be by the devoted labors of the last half-hour, he is in no condition to effect a rescue. A sudden deep rumble from within the sinking ship warns the destroyer captain to go ahead. We are given no chance to aid our shipmates: the propellers tear the water in a furious race that sweeps them away, and we draw off swiftly from the side of the ship.
We waste no time. Rushing down the life-ropes, our small group tries to get a foothold on her decks. The destroyer pulls away as we bounce off, but friendly hands grab the men and pull them aboard. One man doesn’t make it to safety. A soldier loses his grip and falls into the water. The chief officer goes after him. Exhausted and frayed from the intense effort of the last half-hour, he isn’t in any condition to rescue him. A sudden deep rumble from inside the sinking ship warns the destroyer captain to move on. We don’t get the chance to help our shipmates: the propellers churn the water in a wild race that sweeps them away, and we quickly pull away from the ship.
THE MARKET
By William McFee
William McFee's name is associated with the sea, but in his writing he treats the life of ships and sailors more as a background than as the essential substance of his tale. I have chosen this brief and colorful little sketch to represent his talent because it is different from the work with which most of his readers are familiar, and because it represents a mood very characteristic of him—an imaginative and observant treatment of the workings of commerce. His interest in fruit is intimate, as he has been for some years an engineer in the sea service of the United Fruit Company, with a Mediterranean interim—reflected in much of his recent writing—during the War.
William McFee's name is linked to the sea, but in his writing, he uses the lives of ships and sailors more as a backdrop than the main focus of his stories. I’ve picked this short and vivid sketch to showcase his talent because it’s different from the work most of his readers know, and it captures a mood that’s very typical of him—an imaginative and observant take on the workings of trade. His interest in fruit is personal, as he has spent several years working as an engineer in the sea service of the United Fruit Company, with a stint in the Mediterranean—reflected in much of his recent writing—during the War.
The publication of McFee's Casuals of the Sea in 1916 was something of an event in the world of books, and introduced to the reading world a new writer of unquestionable strength and subtlety. His earlier books, An Ocean Tramp and Aliens (both republished since), had gone almost unnoticed—which, it is safe to say, will not happen again to anything he cares to publish. His later books are Captain Macedoine's Daughter, Harbours of Memory, and An Engineer's Notebook. He was born at sea in 1881, the son of a sea-captain; grew up in a northern suburb of London, served his apprenticeship in a big engineering shop, and has been in ships most of the time since 1905.
The release of McFee's Casuals of the Sea in 1916 was a significant event in the literary world and introduced readers to a new writer with undeniable talent and depth. His earlier works, An Ocean Tramp and Aliens (both reissued since), had gone almost unnoticed—which, it’s safe to say, won’t happen again for any future publications of his. His later books include Captain Macedoine's Daughter, Harbours of Memory, and An Engineer's Notebook. He was born at sea in 1881 to a sea captain, grew up in a northern suburb of London, completed his apprenticeship at a large engineering firm, and has spent most of his time on ships since 1905.
THERE is a sharp, imperative rap on my outer door; a rap having within its insistent urgency a shadow of delicate diffidence, as though the person responsible were a trifle scared of the performance and on tiptoe to run away. I roll over and regard the clock. Four-forty. One of the dubious by-products of continuous service as a senior assistant at sea is the habit of waking automatically about 4 A. M. This gives one several hours, when ashore, to meditate upon one's sins, frailties, and (more rarely) triumphs and virtues. For a man who gets up at say four-thirty is regarded with aversion ashore. His family express themselves with superfluous vigor. He must lie still and meditate, or suffer the ignominy of being asked when he is going away again.
There’s a loud, urgent knock on my front door; a knock that carries a hint of nervous hesitation, as if the person knocking is a bit scared and ready to run away. I turn over and check the clock. It’s 4:40. One of the questionable side effects of working as a senior assistant at sea is the tendency to wake up automatically around 4 A.M. This gives someone several hours, when on land, to reflect on their sins, frailties, and (less frequently) their triumphs and virtues. A man who gets up around four-thirty is looked at with disdain on land. His family expresses their feelings with unnecessary intensity. He must lie still and think, or face the embarrassment of being asked when he’s leaving again.
But this morning, in these old Chambers in an ancient Inn buried in the heart of London City, I have agreed to get up and go out. The reason for this momentous departure from a life of temporary but deliberate indolence is a lady. "Cherchez la femme," as the French say with the dry animosity of a logical race. Well, she is not far to seek, being on the outside of my heavy oak door, tapping, as already hinted, with a sharp insistent delicacy. To this romantic summons I reply with an articulate growl of acquiescence, and proceed to get ready. To relieve the anxiety of any reader who imagines an impending elopement it may be stated in succinct truthfulness that we are bound on no such desperate venture. We are going round the corner a few blocks up the Strand, to Covent Garden Market, to see the arrival of the metropolitan supply of produce.
But this morning, in these old chambers of an ancient inn in the heart of London, I’ve decided to get up and head out. The reason for this significant break from a life of temporary but intentional laziness is a lady. “Cherchez la femme,” as the French say, with their characteristic dry wit. Well, she’s not hard to find, being just on the other side of my heavy oak door, tapping with a sharp, insistent delicacy. To this romantic call, I respond with a grumpy acceptance and start getting ready. To ease the mind of any reader who worries about an impending elopement, I should plainly state that we’re not off on any wild adventure. We’re just heading around the corner a few blocks up the Strand, to Covent Garden Market, to see the city’s supply of produce arrive.
Having accomplished a hasty toilet, almost as primitive as that favored by gentlemen aroused to go on watch, and placating an occasional repetition of the tapping by brief protests and reports of progress, I take hat and cane, and drawing the huge antique bolts of my door, discover a young woman standing by the window looking out upon the quadrangle of the old Inn. She is a very decided young woman, who is continually thinking out what she calls "stunts" for articles in the press. That is her profession, or one of her professions—writing articles for the press. The other profession is selling manuscripts, which constitutes the tender bond between us. For the usual agent's commission she is selling one of my manuscripts. Being an unattached and, as it were, unprotected male, she plans little excursions about London to keep me instructed and entertained. Here she is attired in the flamboyant finery of a London flowergirl. She is about to get the necessary copy for a special article in a morning paper. With the exception of a certain expectant flash of her bright black Irish eyes, she is entirely businesslike. Commenting on the beauty of an early summer morning in town, we descend, and passing out under the ponderous ancient archway, we make our leisurely progress westward down the Strand.
After getting ready quickly, almost in a way reminiscent of gentlemen waking up to take their watch, and calming the occasional tapping with quick responses about my progress, I take my hat and cane, pull back the heavy old bolts of my door, and find a young woman standing by the window, looking out at the courtyard of the old Inn. She’s a very determined young woman, always coming up with what she calls "stunts" for articles in the media. That’s her job, or one of them—writing articles. The other job is selling manuscripts, which forms the special connection between us. For the usual agent fee, she’s selling one of my manuscripts. Since I’m a single, somewhat unprotected guy, she plans little outings around London to keep me informed and entertained. Right now, she’s dressed in the eye-catching clothes of a London flower girl. She’s gathering material for a special article in a morning paper. Aside from a quick, hopeful spark in her bright black Irish eyes, she seems very businesslike. As we comment on the beauty of an early summer morning in the city, we head down the heavy old archway and make our way leisurely westward along the Strand.
London is always beautiful to those who love and understand that extraordinary microcosm; but at five of a summer morning there is about her an exquisite quality of youthful fragrance and debonair freshness which goes to the heart. The newly-hosed streets are shining in the sunlight as though paved with "patines of bright gold." Early 'buses rumble by from neighboring barns where they have spent the night. And, as we near the new Gaiety Theatre, thrusting forward into the great rivers of traffic soon to pour round its base like some bold Byzantine promontory, we see Waterloo Bridge thronged with wagons, piled high. From all quarters they are coming, past Charing Cross the great wains are arriving from Paddington Terminal, from the market-garden section of Middlesex and Surrey. Down Wellington Street come carts laden with vegetables from Brentwood and Coggeshall, and neat vans packed with crates of watercress which grows in the lush lowlands of Suffolk and Cambridgeshire, and behind us are thundering huge four-horse vehicles from the docks, vehicles with peaches from South Africa, potatoes from the Canary Islands, onions from France, apples from California, oranges from the West Indies, pineapples from Central America, grapes from Spain and bananas from Colombia.
London is always beautiful to those who appreciate and understand that extraordinary microcosm; but at five in the morning during summer, there’s an exquisite quality of youthful fragrance and lively freshness that touches the heart. The newly-washed streets are shining in the sunlight as if they were paved with "patines of bright gold." Early buses rumble by, coming from nearby garages where they've spent the night. As we approach the new Gaiety Theatre, jutting out into the bustling streams of traffic that will soon flow around its base like a bold Byzantine promontory, we see Waterloo Bridge crowded with wagons piled high. They’re arriving from all directions; past Charing Cross, the large wagons are coming in from Paddington Station, as well as from the market-garden areas of Middlesex and Surrey. Down Wellington Street, carts filled with vegetables are coming from Brentwood and Coggeshall, and neat vans are loaded with crates of watercress that grows in the lush lowlands of Suffolk and Cambridgeshire. Behind us, huge four-horse vehicles are thundering in from the docks, carrying peaches from South Africa, potatoes from the Canary Islands, onions from France, apples from California, oranges from the West Indies, pineapples from Central America, grapes from Spain, and bananas from Colombia.
We turn in under an archway behind a theatre and adjacent to the stage-door of the Opera House. The booths are rapidly filling with produce. Gentlemen in long alpaca coats and carrying formidable marbled note-books walk about with an important air. A mountain range of pumpkins rises behind a hill of cabbages. Festoons of onions are being suspended from rails. The heads of barrels are being knocked in, disclosing purple grapes buried in corkdust. Pears and figs, grown under glass for wealthy patrons, repose in soft tissue-lined boxes. A broken crate of tangerine oranges has spilled its contents in a splash of ruddy gold on the plank runway. A wagon is driven in, a heavy load of beets, and the broad wheels crush through the soft fruit so that the air is heavy with the acrid sweetness.
We go under an archway behind a theater next to the stage door of the Opera House. The booths are quickly filling up with produce. Men in long alpaca coats carrying hefty marbled notebooks stroll around looking important. A mountain of pumpkins rises behind a hill of cabbages. Strings of onions are being hung from rails. The tops of barrels are being knocked in, revealing purple grapes buried in cork dust. Pears and figs, grown under glass for wealthy customers, sit in soft tissue-lined boxes. A broken crate of tangerine oranges has spilled its contents in a splash of ruddy gold on the wooden pathway. A wagon pulls in, loaded down with beets, and the broad wheels crush through the soft fruit, filling the air with a sharp sweetness.
We pick our way among the booths and stalls until we find the flowers. Here is a crowd of ladies, young, so-so and some quite matronly, and all dressed in this same flamboyant finery of which I have spoken. They are grouped about an almost overpowering mass of blooms. Roses just now predominate. There is a satisfying solidity about the bunches, a glorious abundance which, in a commodity so easily enjoyed without ownership, is scarcely credible. I feel no desire to own these huge aggregations of odorous beauty. It would be like owning a harem, one imagines. Violets, solid patches of vivid blue in round baskets, eglantine in dainty boxes, provide a foil to the majestic blazonry of the roses and the dew-spangled forest of maiden-hair fern near by.
We weave through the booths and stalls until we find the flowers. There’s a crowd of women, some young, some average-looking, and a few quite matronly, all dressed in the same over-the-top outfits I mentioned before. They are gathered around an overwhelming display of blooms. Right now, roses take center stage. There’s a satisfying heft to the bunches, a beautiful abundance that seems almost unbelievable for something so easily enjoyed without actually owning it. I don’t feel the urge to own these massive collections of fragrant beauty. It would be like owning a harem, one might think. Violets, vibrant blue patches in round baskets, and eglantine in delicate boxes complement the stunning display of roses and the glistening maiden-hair fern nearby.
"And what are those things at all?" demands my companion, diverted for a moment from the flowers. She nods towards a mass of dull-green affairs piled on mats or being lifted from big vans. She is a Cockney and displays surprise when she is told those things are bananas. She shrugs and turns again to the musk-roses, and forgets. But to me, as the harsh, penetrating odor of the green fruit cuts across the heavy perfume of the flowers, comes a picture of the farms in distant Colombia or perhaps Costa Rica. There is nothing like an odor to stir memories. I see the timber pier and the long line of rackety open-slatted cars jangling into the dark shed, pushed by a noisy, squealing locomotive. I see the boys lying asleep between shifts, their enormous straw hats covering their faces as they sprawl. In the distance rise the blue mountains; behind is the motionless blue sea. I hear the whine of the elevators, the monotonous click of the counters, the harsh cries of irresponsible and argumentative natives. I feel the heat of the tropic day, and see the gleam of the white waves breaking on yellow sands below tall palms. I recall the mysterious impenetrable solitude of the jungle, a solitude alive, if one is equipped with knowledge, with a ceaseless warfare of winged and crawling hosts. And while my companion is busily engaged in getting copy for a special article about the Market, I step nimbly out of the way of a swarthy gentleman from Calabria, who with his two-wheeled barrow is the last link in the immense chain of transportation connecting the farmer in the distant tropics and the cockney pedestrian who halts on the sidewalk and purchases a banana for a couple of pennies.
"And what are those things at all?" my friend asks, momentarily distracted from the flowers. She gestures toward a pile of dull green objects on mats or being unloaded from large vans. She's a Cockney and looks surprised when she learns those things are bananas. She shrugs and goes back to admiring the musk roses, forgetting all about it. But for me, as the sharp, penetrating scent of the green fruit cuts through the heavy aroma of the flowers, images of farms in far-off Colombia or maybe Costa Rica come to mind. There’s nothing like a smell to trigger memories. I picture the wooden pier and the long line of ramshackle open-slatted cars rattling into a dark shed, pushed by a noisy, squeaking train. I see the boys sleeping between shifts, their huge straw hats covering their faces as they sprawl out. In the distance, the blue mountains rise; behind them is the still blue ocean. I hear the whine of the elevators, the steady click of the counters, the loud calls of irresponsible, arguing locals. I feel the heat of the tropical day and see the white waves shining as they crash onto yellow sands beneath tall palm trees. I remember the mysterious, impenetrable solitude of the jungle, alive with a constant battle of flying and crawling creatures, if you know what to look for. And while my friend is busy gathering material for a special piece on the Market, I quickly move aside for a dark-skinned man from Calabria, who with his two-wheeled cart represents the last link in the vast transportation chain connecting the farmer in the distant tropics to the Cockney passerby who stops on the sidewalk to buy a banana for a couple of pennies.
HOLY IRELAND
By Joyce Kilmer
This echo of the A.E.F. is probably the best thing Joyce Kilmer ever wrote, and shows the vein of real tenderness and insight that lay beneath his lively and versatile career on Grub Street. In him, as in many idealists, the Irish theme had become legendary, it was part of his religion and his dream-life, and he treated it with real affection and humor. You will find it cropping out many times in his verses. The Irish problem as it is reflected in this country is not always clearly understood. Ireland, in the minds of our poets, is a mystical land of green hills, saints and leprechauns, and its political problems are easy.
This echo of the A.E.F. is probably the best thing Joyce Kilmer ever wrote, and it reveals the real tenderness and insight beneath his lively and versatile career on Grub Street. For him, as with many idealists, the Irish theme had become legendary; it was part of his religion and dreams, and he approached it with genuine affection and humor. You'll see it appear frequently in his poems. The Irish issue as it's understood in this country isn't always clear. In the minds of our poets, Ireland is a mystical land of green hills, saints, and leprechauns, and its political problems seem simple.
Joyce Kilmer was born in New Brunswick in 1886; studied at Rutgers College and Columbia University; taught school; worked on the staff of the Standard Dictionary; passed through phases of socialism and Anglicanism into the Catholic communion, and joined the Sunday staff of the New York Times in 1913. He was killed fighting in France in 1918. This sketch is taken from the second of the three volumes in which Robert Cortes Holliday, his friend and executor, has collected Joyce Kilmer's work.
Joyce Kilmer was born in New Brunswick in 1886; he studied at Rutgers College and Columbia University; taught school; worked on the staff of the Standard Dictionary; went through phases of socialism and Anglicanism before converting to Catholicism, and joined the Sunday staff of the New York Times in 1913. He was killed while fighting in France in 1918. This sketch is taken from the second of the three volumes in which Robert Cortes Holliday, his friend and executor, has gathered Joyce Kilmer's work.
WE had hiked seventeen miles that stormy December day—the third of a four days' journey. The snow was piled high on our packs, our rifles were crusted with ice, the leather of our hob-nailed boots was frozen stiff over our lamed feet. The weary lieutenant led us to the door of a little house in a side street.
WE had hiked seventeen miles that stormy December day—the third of a four-day journey. The snow was piled high on our backpacks, our rifles were caked with ice, and the leather of our hob-nailed boots was frozen solid over our sore feet. The exhausted lieutenant guided us to the door of a small house on a side street.
"Next twelve men," he said. A dozen of us dropped out of the ranks and dragged ourselves over the threshold. We tracked snow and mud over a spotless stone floor. Before an open fire stood Madame and the three children—a girl of eight years, a boy of five, a boy of three. They stared with round frightened eyes at les soldats Americans, the first they had ever seen. We were too tired to stare back. We at once climbed to the chill attic, our billet, our lodging for the night. First we lifted the packs from one another's aching shoulders: then, without spreading our blankets, we lay down on the bare boards.
"Next twelve men," he said. A dozen of us stepped out of the ranks and dragged ourselves over the threshold. We tracked snow and mud across a spotless stone floor. Before an open fire stood Madame and her three children—a girl of eight, a boy of five, and a boy of three. They stared with wide, scared eyes at the American soldiers, the first they had ever seen. We were too exhausted to stare back. We immediately climbed to the cold attic, our billet, our place to sleep for the night. First, we lifted the packs from each other's aching shoulders; then, without spreading our blankets, we lay down on the bare boards.
For ten minutes there was silence, broken by an occasional groan, an oath, the striking of a match. Cigarettes glowed like fireflies in a forest. Then a voice came from the corner:
For ten minutes, there was silence, interrupted only by an occasional groan, a curse, or the sound of a match being struck. Cigarettes glowed like fireflies in a forest. Then a voice came from the corner:
"Where is Sergeant Reilly?" it said. We lazily searched. There was no Sergeant Reilly to be found.
"Where's Sergeant Reilly?" it asked. We searched around casually. There was no Sergeant Reilly anywhere.
"I'll bet the old bum has gone out after a pint," said the voice. And with the curiosity of the American and the enthusiasm of the Irish we lumbered downstairs in quest of Sergeant Reilly.
"I'll bet that old guy has gone out for a drink," said the voice. With the curiosity of an American and the excitement of an Irish person, we made our way downstairs looking for Sergeant Reilly.
He was sitting on a low bench by the fire. His shoes were off and his bruised feet were in a pail of cold water. He was too good a soldier to expose them to the heat at once. The little girl was on his lap and the little boys stood by and envied him. And in a voice that twenty years of soldiering and oceans of whisky had failed to rob of its Celtic sweetness, he was softly singing: "Ireland Isn't Ireland Any More." We listened respectfully.
He was sitting on a low bench by the fire. His shoes were off, and his bruised feet were in a bucket of cold water. He was too good of a soldier to expose them to the heat all at once. The little girl was on his lap, and the little boys stood by, envious of him. In a voice that twenty years of serving and oceans of whiskey hadn’t robbed of its Celtic sweetness, he was softly singing: "Ireland Isn't Ireland Anymore." We listened with respect.
"They cheer the King and then salute him," said Sergeant Reilly.
"They cheer for the King and then salute him," said Sergeant Reilly.
"A regular Irishman would shoot him," and we all joined in the chorus, "Ireland Isn't Ireland Any More."
"A typical Irish guy would shoot him," and we all chimed in with the chorus, "Ireland Isn't Ireland Anymore."
"Ooh, la, la!" exclaimed Madame, and she and all the children began to talk at the top of their voices. What they said Heaven knows, but the tones were friendly, even admiring.
"Ooh, la, la!" exclaimed Madame, and she and all the children started talking loudly. What they said, only Heaven knows, but their tones were friendly, even admiring.
"Gentlemen," said Sergeant Reilly from his post of honor, "the lady who runs this billet is a very nice lady indeed. She says yez can all take off your shoes and dry your socks by the fire. But take turns and don't crowd or I'll turn yez all upstairs."
"Gentlemen," Sergeant Reilly announced from his spot of honor, "the lady in charge of this place is really nice. She says you can all take off your shoes and dry your socks by the fire. But make sure to take turns and not crowd, or I'll send you all upstairs."
Now Madame, a woman of some forty years, was a true bourgeoise, with all the thrift of her class. And by the terms of her agreement with the authorities she was required to let the soldiers have for one night the attic of her house to sleep in—nothing more; no light, no heat. Also, wood is very expensive in France—for reasons that are engraven in letters of blood on the pages of history. Nevertheless—
Now Madame, a woman in her forties, was a true middle-class person, with all the frugality typical of her social class. According to her agreement with the authorities, she was obligated to allow the soldiers to use the attic of her house for one night to sleep—nothing else; no light, no heat. Also, wood is very expensive in France—for reasons that are deeply engraved in the pages of history. Nevertheless—
"Asseyez-vous, s'il vous plait," said Madame. And she brought nearer to the fire all the chairs the establishment possessed and some chests and boxes to be used as seats. And she and the little girl, whose name was Solange, went out into the snow and came back with heaping armfuls of small logs. The fire blazed merrily—more merrily than it had blazed since August, 1914, perhaps. We surrounded it, and soon the air was thick with steam from our drying socks.
“Please, have a seat,” said Madame. She pulled all the chairs from the establishment closer to the fire, along with some chests and boxes for extra seating. She and the little girl, named Solange, stepped out into the snow and returned with heaping armfuls of small logs. The fire crackled cheerfully—more cheerfully than it had since August 1914, maybe. We gathered around it, and soon the air was filled with steam from our drying socks.
Meanwhile Madame and the Sergeant had generously admitted all eleven of us into their conversation. A spirited conversation it was, too, in spite of the fact that she knew no English and the extent of his French was "du pain," "du vin," "cognac" and "bon jour." Those of us who knew a little more of the language of the country acted as interpreters for the others. We learned the names of the children and their ages. We learned that our hostess was a widow. Her husband had fallen in battle just one month before our arrival in her home. She showed us with simple pride and affection and restrained grief his picture. Then she showed us those of her two brothers—one now fighting at Salonica, the other a prisoner of war—of her mother and father, of herself dressed for First Communion.
Meanwhile, Madame and the Sergeant had warmly included all eleven of us in their conversation. It was a lively discussion, even though she didn't speak any English and his French was limited to "bread," "wine," "cognac," and "hello." Those of us who understood a bit more of the local language acted as interpreters for the others. We learned the names and ages of the children. We found out that our hostess was a widow. Her husband had died in battle just one month before we arrived at her home. She showed us his picture with a mix of pride, affection, and quiet sorrow. Then she showed us pictures of her two brothers—one currently fighting in Salonica, the other a prisoner of war—of her mother and father, and of herself dressed for her First Communion.
This last picture she showed somewhat shyly, as if doubting that we would understand it. But when one of us asked in halting French if Solange, her little daughter, had yet made her First Communion, then Madame's face cleared.
This last picture she displayed a bit shyly, as if unsure we would get it. But when one of us asked in unsure French if Solange, her little daughter, had already had her First Communion, Madame's expression brightened.
At once rosary beads were flourished to prove our right to answer this question affirmatively. Tattered prayer-books and somewhat dingy scapulars were brought to light. Madame and the children chattered their surprise and delight to each other, and every exhibit called for a new outburst.
Immediately, rosary beads were shown off to demonstrate our right to answer this question with a yes. Worn prayer books and slightly dirty scapulars were pulled out. Madame and the children chatted excitedly about their surprise and joy, and each item led to another round of cheers.
"Ah, le bon S. Benoit! Ah, voilà, le Conception Immacule! Ooh la la, le Sacré Cœur!" (which last exclamation sounded in no wise as irreverent as it looks in print).
"Ah, good St. Benedict! Ah, there’s the Immaculate Conception! Ooh la la, the Sacred Heart!" (which last exclamation didn’t sound irreverent at all when spoken).
Now other treasures, too, were shown—treasures chiefly photographic. There were family groups, there were Coney Island snapshots. And Madame and the children were a gratifyingly appreciative audience. They admired and sympathized; they exclaimed appropriately at the beauty of every girl's face, the tenderness of every pictured mother. We had become the intimates of Madame. She had admitted us into her family and we her into ours.
Now other treasures were displayed—mainly photographs. There were family portraits, and there were snapshots from Coney Island. Madame and the kids were a wonderfully appreciative audience. They admired and sympathized; they reacted appropriately to the beauty of every girl's face and the affection shown in every picture of a mother. We had become close with Madame. She had welcomed us into her family, and we had welcomed her into ours.
Soldiers—American soldiers of Irish descent—have souls and hearts. These organs (if the soul may be so termed) had been satisfied. But our stomachs remained—and that they yearned was evident to us. We had made our hike on a meal of hardtack and "corned willy." Mess call would sound soon. Should we force our wet shoes on again and plod through the snowy streets to the temporary mess-shack? We knew our supply wagons had not succeeded in climbing the last hill into town, and that therefore bread and unsweetened coffee would be our portion. A great depression settled upon us.
Soldiers—American soldiers of Irish descent—have souls and hearts. These organs (if the soul could be called that) had been satisfied. But our stomachs were still empty—and it was clear that they were aching for food. We had gone on our hike with just hardtack and "corned willy." Mess call would ring out soon. Should we put our wet shoes back on and trudge through the snowy streets to the temporary mess hall? We knew our supply wagons hadn't managed to make it over the last hill into town, so bread and unsweetened coffee would be all we got. A heavy gloom settled over us.
But Sergeant Reilly rose to the occasion.
But Sergeant Reilly stepped up to the challenge.
"Boys," he said, "this here lady has got a good fire going, and I'll bet she can cook. What do you say we get her to fix us up a meal?"
"Boys," he said, "this lady has a nice fire going, and I bet she can cook. How about we ask her to make us a meal?"
The proposal was received joyously at first. Then some one said:
The proposal was met with excitement at first. Then someone said:
"But I haven't got any money." "Neither have I—not a damn sou!" said another. And again the spiritual temperature of the room fell.
"But I don't have any money." "Me neither—not a single cent!" said another. And once more, the mood in the room dropped.
Again Sergeant Reilly spoke:
Again, Sergeant Reilly said:
"I haven't got any money to speak of, meself," he said. "But let's have a show-down. I guess we've got enough to buy somethin' to eat."
"I don't have much money to speak of, myself," he said. "But let's be honest. I think we have enough to buy something to eat."
It was long after pay-day, and we were not hopeful of the results of the search. But the wealthy (that is, those who had two francs) made up for the poor (that is, those who had two sous). And among the coins on the table I noticed an American dime, an English half-crown and a Chinese piece with a square hole in the center. In negotiable tender the money came in all to eight francs.
It was long after payday, and we weren't very hopeful about the outcome of the search. But the wealthy (meaning those who had two francs) made up for the poor (meaning those who had two sous). Among the coins on the table, I spotted an American dime, an English half-crown, and a Chinese coin with a square hole in the center. In total, the money added up to eight francs.
It takes more money than that to feed twelve hungry soldiers these days in France. But there was no harm in trying. So an ex-seminarian, an ex-bookkeeper and an ex-street-car conductor aided Sergeant Reilly in explaining in French that had both a brogue and a Yankee twang that we were hungry, that this was all the money we had in the world, and that we wanted her to cook us something to eat.
It takes more money than that to feed twelve hungry soldiers these days in France. But there was no harm in trying. So an ex-seminarian, an ex-bookkeeper, and an ex-streetcar conductor helped Sergeant Reilly explain in French, which had both a strong accent and a Yankee twang, that we were hungry, that this was all the money we had in the world, and that we wanted her to cook us something to eat.
Now Madame was what they call in New England a "capable" woman. In a jiffy she had the money in Solange's hand and had that admirable child cloaked and wooden-shod for the street, and fully informed as to what she was to buy. What Madame and the children had intended to have for supper I do not know, for there was nothing in the kitchen but the fire, the stove, the table, some shelves of dishes and an enormous bed. Nothing in the way of a food cupboard could be seen. And the only other room of the house was the bare attic.
Now Madame was what they call a "capable" woman in New England. In no time, she had money in Solange's hand and had that wonderful child dressed warmly for the street and fully briefed on what she was supposed to buy. I don’t know what Madame and the kids had planned for dinner, because there was nothing in the kitchen but a fire, a stove, a table, some shelves of dishes, and a huge bed. There was no sign of a food cupboard anywhere. The only other room in the house was the empty attic.
When Solange came back she carried in a basket bigger than herself these articles: (1) two loaves of war-bread; (2) five bottles of red wine; (3) three cheeses; (4) numerous potatoes; (5) a lump of fat; (6) a bag of coffee. The whole represented, as was afterward demonstrated, exactly the sum of ten francs, fifty centimes.
When Solange returned, she brought in a basket larger than herself that held: (1) two loaves of bread; (2) five bottles of red wine; (3) three cheeses; (4) several potatoes; (5) a chunk of fat; (6) a bag of coffee. As was later shown, all of this added up to exactly ten francs and fifty centimes.
Well, we all set to work peeling potatoes. Then with a veritable French trench-knife Madame cut the potatoes into long strips. Meanwhile Solange had put the lump of fat into the big black pot that hung by a chain over the fire. In the boiling grease the potatoes were placed, Madame standing by with a big ladle punched full of holes (I regret that I do not know the technical name for this instrument) and keeping the potato-strips swimming, zealously frustrating any attempt on their part to lie lazily at the bottom of the pot.
Well, we all got to work peeling potatoes. Then, with a real French knife, Madame cut the potatoes into long strips. Meanwhile, Solange had put the chunk of fat into the big black pot that hung by a chain over the fire. The potatoes were placed in the boiling grease, with Madame standing by, using a big ladle full of holes (I’m sorry I don’t know the technical name for this tool) and keeping the potato strips moving, diligently preventing them from lazily resting at the bottom of the pot.
We forgot all about the hike as we sat at supper that evening. The only absentees were the two little boys, Michael and Paul. And they were really absent only from our board—they were in the room, in the great built-in bed that was later to hold also Madame and Solange. Their little bodies were covered by the three-foot thick mattress-like red silk quilt, but their tousled heads protruded and they watched us unblinkingly all the evening.
We completely forgot about the hike as we sat down for dinner that evening. The only ones missing were the two little boys, Michael and Paul. And they were only absent from our table—they were in the room, in the big built-in bed that would later also hold Madame and Solange. Their little bodies were under a thick, three-foot red silk quilt, but their messy hair stuck out, and they watched us intently the entire evening.
But just as we sat down, before Sergeant Reilly began his task of dishing out the potatoes and starting the bottles on their way, Madame stopped her chattering and looked at Solange. And Solange stopped her chattering and looked at Madame. And they both looked rather searchingly at us. We didn't know what was the matter, but we felt rather embarrassed.
But just as we sat down, before Sergeant Reilly started handing out the potatoes and passing the bottles around, Madame stopped her talking and looked at Solange. Solange stopped her talking and looked at Madame. They both looked rather closely at us. We didn't know what was going on, but we felt pretty embarrassed.
We sprang to our feet at once. But it was not Sergeant Reilly who saved the situation. Instead, the ex-seminarian (he is only temporarily an ex-seminarian; he'll be preaching missions and giving retreats yet if a bit of shrapnel doesn't hasten his journey to Heaven) said, after we had blessed ourselves: "Benedicite; nos et quae sumus sumpturi benedicat Deus, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Amen."
We jumped to our feet immediately. But it wasn’t Sergeant Reilly who saved the day. Instead, the former seminarian (he's only a former seminarian for now; he'll be preaching missions and giving retreats again unless a bit of shrapnel sends him to Heaven first) said, after we had blessed ourselves: "Bless us and whatever we are about to receive, may God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, bless us. Amen."
Madame and Solange, obviously relieved, joined us in the Amen, and we sat down again to eat.
Madame and Solange, clearly relieved, joined us in saying Amen, and we sat back down to eat.
It was a memorable feast. There was not much conversation—except on the part of Madame and Solange—but there was plenty of good cheer. Also there was enough cheese and bread and wine and potatoes for all of us—half starved as we were when we sat down. Even big Considine, who drains a can of condensed milk at a gulp and has been known to eat an apple pie without stopping to take breath, was satisfied. There were toasts, also, all proposed by Sergeant Reilly—toasts to Madame, and to the children, and to France, and to the United States, and to the Old Gray Mare (this last toast having an esoteric significance apparent only to illuminati of Sergeant Reilly's circle).
It was an unforgettable feast. There wasn't much talking—except from Madame and Solange—but the atmosphere was full of good cheer. There was also plenty of cheese, bread, wine, and potatoes for all of us—half-starved as we were when we sat down. Even big Considine, who can gulp down a can of condensed milk in one go and has been known to devour an apple pie without stopping for breath, was satisfied. There were toasts as well, all suggested by Sergeant Reilly—toasts to Madame, to the kids, to France, to the United States, and to the Old Gray Mare (the last toast having a special meaning only understood by the insiders in Sergeant Reilly's circle).
The table cleared and the "agimus tibi gratias" duly said, we sat before the fire, most of us on the floor. We were warm and happy and full of good food and good wine. I spied a slip of paper on the floor by Solange's foot and unashamedly read it. It was an accounting for the evening's expenditures—totaling exactly ten francs and fifty centimes.
The table was cleared and the "thank you" was properly said, we sat in front of the fire, most of us on the floor. We were warm, happy, and full of good food and wine. I noticed a piece of paper on the floor by Solange's foot and casually read it. It was a record of the evening's expenses—totaling exactly ten francs and fifty centimes.
Now when soldiers are unhappy—during a long, hard hike, for instance—they sing to keep up their spirits. And when they are happy, as on the evening now under consideration, they sing to express their satisfaction with life. We sang "Sweet Rosie O'Grady." We shook the kitchen-bedroom with the echoes of "Take Me Back to New York Town." We informed Madame, Solange, Paul, Michael, in fact, the whole village, that we had never been a wanderer and that we longed for our Indiana home. We grew sentimental over "Mother Machree." And Sergeant Reilly obliged with a reel—in his socks—to an accomplishment of whistling and handclapping.
Now, when soldiers are feeling down—like during a long, tough hike—they sing to lift their spirits. And when they're happy, like on the evening we're discussing, they sing to show their enjoyment of life. We sang "Sweet Rosie O'Grady." We filled the kitchen-bedroom with the echoes of "Take Me Back to New York Town." We let Madame, Solange, Paul, Michael, and everyone in the village know that we had never been wanderers and that we missed our Indiana home. We got sentimental over "Mother Machree." And Sergeant Reilly stepped in with a reel—in his socks—while whistling and clapping his hands.
Now, it was our hostess's turn to entertain. We intimated as much. She responded, first by much talk, much consultation with Solange, and finally by going to one of the shelves that held the pans and taking down some paper-covered books.
Now, it was our hostess's turn to entertain. We hinted at that. She responded first with a lot of chatter and discussions with Solange, and finally by going to one of the shelves that held the pans and grabbing some paper-covered books.
There was more consultation, whispered this time, and much turning of pages. Then, after some preliminary coughing and humming, the music began—the woman's rich alto blending with the child's shrill but sweet notes. And what they sang was "Tantum ergo Sacramentum."
There was more quiet discussion, this time in hushed tones, and a lot of page flipping. Then, after some light coughing and humming, the music started—A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__—the woman's deep alto mixing with the child's piercing but lovely notes. And what they sang was "Tantum ergo Sacramentum."
Why she should have thought that an appropriate song to offer this company of rough soldiers from a distant land I do not know. And why we found it appropriate it is harder still to say. But it did seem appropriate to all of us—to Sergeant Reilly, to Jim (who used to drive a truck), to Larry (who sold cigars), to Frank (who tended a bar on Fourteenth Street). It seemed, for some reason, eminently fitting. Not one of us then or later expressed any surprise that this hymn, familiar to most of us since our mothers first led us to the Parish Church down the pavements of New York or across the Irish hills, should be sung to us in this strange land and in these strange circumstances.
I don’t know why she thought it was a fitting song to share with this group of tough soldiers from far away. It’s even harder to explain why we all thought it was appropriate. But somehow, it felt right to all of us—to Sergeant Reilly, to Jim (who used to drive a truck), to Larry (who sold cigars), and to Frank (who worked at a bar on Fourteenth Street). For some reason, it seemed totally suitable. None of us, then or later, were surprised that this hymn, known to most of us since our mothers first took us to the Parish Church down the streets of New York or across the Irish hills, would be sung to us in this unfamiliar land and in these unusual circumstances.
Since the gracious Latin of the Church was in order and since the season was appropriate, one of us suggested "Adeste Fideles" for the next item on the evening's program. Madame and Solange and our ex-seminarian knew all the words and the rest of us came in strong with "Venite, adoremus Dominum."
Since the lovely Latin of the Church was fitting and the timing was right, one of us suggested "Adeste Fideles" as the next song for the evening's program. Madame, Solange, and our former seminarian knew all the lyrics, and the rest of us joined in confidently with "Venite, adoremus Dominum."
Then, as if to show that piety and mirth may live together, the ladies obliged with "Au Clair de la Lune" and other simple ballads of old France. And after taps had sounded in the street outside our door, and there was yawning, and wrist-watches were being scanned, the evening's entertainment ended, by general consent, with patriotic selections. We sang—as best we could—the "Star-Spangled Banner," Solange and her mother humming the air and applauding at the conclusion. Then we attempted "La Marseillaise." Of course, we did not know the words. Solange came to our rescue with two little pamphlets containing the song, so we looked over each other's shoulders and got to work in earnest. Madame sang with us, and Solange. But during the final stanza Madame did not sing. She leaned against the great family bedstead and looked at us. She had taken one of the babies from under the red comforter and held him to her breast. One of her red and toil-scarred hands half covered his fat little back. There was a gentle dignity about that plain, hard-working woman, that soldier's widow—we all felt it. And some of us saw the tears in her eyes.
Then, to show that piety and joy can coexist, the ladies treated us to "Au Clair de la Lune" and other simple ballads from old France. After taps sounded outside our door, and people started yawning and checking their wristwatches, we agreed to wrap up the evening's entertainment with some patriotic songs. We sang—the best we could—the "Star-Spangled Banner," with Solange and her mother humming along and clapping at the end. Then we tried "La Marseillaise." Of course, we didn’t know the words. Solange helped us out with two little pamphlets containing the lyrics, so we leaned over each other's shoulders and got to it in earnest. Madame sang along with us and Solange. But during the final stanza, Madame stopped singing. She leaned against the big family bed and watched us. She had taken one of the babies from under the red comforter and cradled him to her chest. One of her rough, red hands gently covered his chubby little back. There was a quiet dignity about that hardworking woman, that soldier's widow—we all felt it. And some of us noticed the tears in her eyes.
There are mists, faint and beautiful and unchanging, that hang over the green slopes of some mountains I know. I have seen them on the Irish hills and I have seen them on the hills of France. I think that they are made of the tears of good brave women.
There are mists, soft and beautiful and unchanging, that linger over the green slopes of some mountains I know. I've seen them on the Irish hills and I've seen them on the hills of France. I believe they are made from the tears of strong, brave women.
Before I went to sleep that night I exchanged a few words with Sergeant Reilly. We lay side by side on the floor, now piled with straw. Blankets, shelter-halves, slickers and overcoats insured warm sleep. Sergeant Reilly's hard old face was wrapped round with his muffler. The final cigarette of the day burned lazily in a corner of his mouth.
Before I went to sleep that night, I chatted a bit with Sergeant Reilly. We were lying side by side on the floor, which was now covered in straw. Blankets, shelter-halves, slickers, and overcoats kept us warm. Sergeant Reilly's tough old face was wrapped in his scarf, and the last cigarette of the day smoldered lazily in the corner of his mouth.
"That was a pretty good evening, Sarge," I said. "We sure were in luck when we struck this billet."
"That was a great evening, Sarge," I said. "We really lucked out when we got this place."
He grunted affirmatively, then puffed in silence for a few minutes. Then he deftly spat the cigarette into a strawless portion of the floor, where it glowed for a few seconds before it went out.
He grunted in agreement, then quietly smoked for a few minutes. After that, he skillfully spat the cigarette onto a bare spot on the floor, where it glowed for a few seconds before going out.
"You said it," he remarked. "We were in luck is right. What do you know about that lady, anyway?"
"You said it," he said. "We really lucked out, didn't we? What do you know about that woman, anyway?"
"Why," I answered, "I thought she treated us pretty white."
"Why," I replied, "I thought she treated us really well."
"Joe," said Sergeant Reilly, "do you realize how much trouble that woman took to make this bunch of roughnecks comfortable? She didn't make a damn cent on that feed, you know. The kid spent all the money we give her. And she's out about six francs for firewood, too—I wish to God I had the money to pay her. I bet she'll go cold for a week now, and hungry, too.
"Joe," said Sergeant Reilly, "do you realize how much effort that woman put into making this group of tough guys comfortable? She didn't make a single cent on that food, you know. The kid spent all the money we gave her. And she's out about six francs for firewood, too—I wish I had the money to pay her. I bet she'll be cold for a week now, and hungry, too."
"And that ain't all," he continued, after a pause broken only by an occasional snore from our blissful neighbors. "Look at the way she cooked them pomme de terres and fixed things up for us and let us sit down there with her like we was her family. And look at the way she and the little Sallie there sung for us.
"I tell you, Joe, it makes me think of old times to hear a woman sing them church hymns to me that way. It's forty years since I heard a hymn sung in a kitchen, and it was my mother, God rest her, that sang them. I sort of realize what we're fighting for now, and I never did before. It's for women like that and their kids.
"I tell you, Joe, hearing a woman sing those church hymns to me takes me back to the old days. It's been forty years since I heard a hymn sung in a kitchen, and it was my mother, may she rest in peace, who sang them. I finally understand what we're fighting for now, something I never did before. It's for women like her and their kids."
"It gave me a turn to see her a-sitting there singing them hymns. I remembered when I was a boy in Shangolden. I wonder if there's many women like that in France now—telling their beads and singing the old hymns and treating poor traveling men the way she's just after treating us. There used to be lots of women like that in the Old Country. And I think that's why it was called 'Holy Ireland.'"
"It surprised me to see her sitting there singing those hymns. I remembered when I was a boy in Shangolden. I wonder if there are many women like that in France now—praying and singing the old hymns and treating poor travelers the way she just treated us. There used to be a lot of women like that in the Old Country. I think that's why it was called 'Holy Ireland.'"
A FAMILIAR PREFACE
By Joseph Conrad
This glorious expression of the credo of all artists, in whatever form of creation, lastingly enriches the English tongue. It is from the preface to A Personal Record, that fascinating autobiographical volume in which Conrad tells the curious story of a Polish boy who ran away to sea and began to write in English. As a companion piece, those who have the honor of the writer's craft at heart should read Conrad's preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus.
This amazing expression of the beliefs of all artists, in any form of creation, greatly enriches the English language. It comes from the preface to A Personal Record, that intriguing autobiographical book where Conrad tells the story of a Polish boy who ran away to sea and started writing in English. As a companion piece, anyone who values the writer's craft should read Conrad's preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus.
"All ambitions are lawful except those which climb upward on the miseries or credulities of mankind." Is it permissible to wonder what some newspaper owners—say Mr. Hearst—would reply to that?
"All ambitions are acceptable except those that take advantage of the suffering or gullibility of people." Can we ask how some newspaper owners—like Mr. Hearst—would respond to that?
Mr. Conrad's career is too well known to be annotated here. If by any chance the reader is not acquainted with it, it will be to his soul's advantage to go to a public library and look it up.
Mr. Conrad's career is too well-known to be detailed here. If, by any chance, the reader isn't familiar with it, it would be beneficial for them to visit a public library and look it up.
AS a general rule we do not want much encouragement to talk about ourselves; yet this little book[A] is the result of a friendly suggestion, and even of a little friendly pressure. I defended myself with some spirit; but, with characteristic tenacity, the friendly voice insisted, "You know, you really must."
AS generally, we don't need much encouragement to talk about ourselves; however, this little book[A] is the outcome of a friendly suggestion, and even a bit of friendly pressure. I put up a bit of a fight; but, true to form, the friendly voice persisted, "You know, you really should."
It was not an argument, but I submitted at once. If one must!...
It wasn't really an argument, but I gave in immediately. If it has to be done!...
You perceive the force of a word. He who wants to persuade should put his trust not in the right argument, but in the right word. The power of sound has always been greater than the power of sense. I don't say this by way of disparagement. It is better for mankind to be impressionable than reflective. Nothing humanely great—great, I mean, as affecting a whole mass of lives—has come from reflection. On the other hand, you cannot fail to see the power of mere words; such words as Glory, for instance, or Pity. I won't mention any more. They are not far to seek. Shouted with perseverance, with ardor, with conviction, these two by their sound alone have set whole nations in motion and upheaved the dry, hard ground on which rests our whole social fabric. There's "virtue" for you if you like!... Of course, the accent must be attended to. The right accent. That's very important. The capacious lung, the thundering or the tender vocal chords. Don't talk to me of your Archimedes' lever. He was an absent-minded person with a mathematical imagination. Mathematics commands all my respect, but I have no use for engines. Give me the right word and the right accent and I will move the world.
You understand the impact of a word. If you want to persuade someone, you shouldn't rely just on the right argument, but on the right word. The power of sound has always been stronger than the power of meaning. I'm not saying this to put it down. It's better for humanity to be impressionable than overly analytical. Nothing truly significant—something that impacts a large number of lives—has come from deep reflection. On the flip side, you can't ignore the power of simple words; take words like Glory or Pity, for example. I won't list more; they’re easy to find. Shouted with persistence, passion, and belief, these words alone have inspired entire nations and shaken the firm ground beneath our social structure. There's "virtue" for you if you're into that!... Of course, you need to pay attention to how you say it. The right tone is crucial. Having a strong voice, whether booming or gentle, matters a lot. Don't talk to me about Archimedes' lever. He was a distracted genius with a mathematical vision. I respect math, but I have no use for machines. Just give me the right word and the right tone, and I can change the world.
What a dream for a writer! Because written words have their accent, too. Yes! Let me only find the right word! Surely it must be lying somewhere among the wreckage of all the plaints and all the exultations poured out aloud since the first day when hope, the undying, came down on earth. It may be there, close by, disregarded, invisible, quite at hand. But it's no good. I believe there are men who can lay hold of a needle in a pottle of hay at the first try. For myself, I have never had such luck.
What a dream for a writer! Because written words have their own tone, too. Yes! If I could just find the right word! It must be buried somewhere in the wreckage of all the complaints and all the celebrations expressed since the first day when hope, the eternal, came to earth. It might be right there, nearby, overlooked, unseen, just within reach. But it's pointless. I think there are people who can grab a needle from a haystack on their first try. As for me, I’ve never had that kind of luck.
And then there is that accent. Another difficulty. For who is going to tell whether the accent is right or wrong till the word is shouted, and fails to be heard, perhaps, and goes down-wind, leaving the world unmoved? Once upon a time there lived an emperor who was a sage and something of a literary man. He jotted down on ivory tablets thoughts, maxims, reflections which chance has preserved for the edification of posterity. Among other sayings—I am quoting from memory—I remember this solemn admonition: "Let all thy words have the accent of heroic truth." The accent of heroic truth! This is very fine, but I am thinking that it is an easy matter for an austere emperor to jot down grandiose advice. Most of the working truths on this earth are humble, not heroic; and there have been times in the history of mankind when the accents of heroic truth have moved it to nothing but derision.
And then there's that accent. Another challenge. Who can really tell if the accent is right or wrong until the word is shouted, maybe not heard, and gets carried away by the wind, leaving the world untouched? Once upon a time, there was an emperor who was wise and a bit of a literary guy. He wrote down his thoughts, maxims, and reflections on ivory tablets, which chance has kept for the inspiration of future generations. Among other sayings—I’m quoting from memory—I remember this serious advice: "Let all your words carry the accent of heroic truth." The accent of heroic truth! That sounds great, but I think it's easy for a stern emperor to write down such grand advice. Most of the genuine truths in this world are humble, not heroic; and there have been moments in human history when the accents of heroic truth have led to nothing but mockery.
Nobody will expect to find between the covers of this little book words of extraordinary potency or accents of irresistible heroism. However humiliating for my self-esteem, I must confess that the counsels of Marcus Aurelius are not for me. They are more fit for a moralist than for an artist. Truth of a modest sort I can promise you, and also sincerity. That complete, praiseworthy sincerity which, while it delivers one into the hands of one's enemies, is as likely as not to embroil one with one's friends.
Nobody will expect to find extraordinary wisdom or compelling heroism in this little book. As humiliating as it is for my self-esteem, I have to admit that the advice of Marcus Aurelius isn't for me. It's more suitable for a moralist than for an artist. I can promise you a kind of plain truth and also honesty. That kind of complete, admirable honesty that, while it might put you at risk with your enemies, could easily get you tangled up with your friends.
"Embroil" is perhaps too strong an expression. I can't imagine among either my enemies or my friends a being so hard up for something to do as to quarrel with me. "To disappoint one's friends" would be nearer the mark. Most, almost all, friendships of the writing period of my life have come to me through my books; and I know that a novelist lives in his work. He stands there, the only reality in an invented world, among imaginary things, happenings, and people. Writing about them, he is only writing about himself. But the disclosure is not complete. He remains, to a certain extent, a figure behind the veil; a suspected rather than a seen presence—a movement and a voice behind the draperies of fiction. In these personal notes there is no such veil. And I cannot help thinking of a passage in the "Imitation of Christ" where the ascetic author, who knew life so profoundly, says that "there are persons esteemed on their reputation who by showing themselves destroy the opinion one had of them." This is the danger incurred by an author of fiction who sets out to talk about himself without disguise.
"Embroil" might be too strong a word. I can't really picture anyone—friends or enemies—being so bored that they'd want to argue with me. "To disappoint one's friends" is more accurate. Almost all the friendships I’ve formed during my writing career have come through my books; I know that a novelist exists in his work. He stands there, the only real thing in a made-up world, surrounded by imaginary objects, events, and characters. By writing about them, he's really just writing about himself. But the full picture is not revealed. He still remains, to some extent, a figure behind a curtain; a suspected presence rather than a fully visible one—a movement and a voice behind the fabric of fiction. In these personal notes, there’s no curtain. And I can't help but think of a passage in the "Imitation of Christ" where the ascetic author, who understood life so well, says that "there are people who are valued for their reputation, but when they reveal themselves, they ruin the opinion others had of them." This is the risk faced by a fiction writer who tries to talk about himself without any mask.
While these reminiscent pages were appearing serially I was remonstrated with for bad economy; as if such writing were a form of self-indulgence wasting the substance of future volumes. It seems that I am not sufficiently literary. Indeed, a man who never wrote a line for print till he was thirty-six cannot bring himself to look upon his existence and his experience, upon the sum of his thoughts, sensations, and emotions, upon his memories and his regrets, and the whole possession of his past, as only so much material for his hands. Once before, some three years ago, when I published "The Mirror of the Sea," a volume of impressions and memories, the same remarks were made to me. Practical remarks. But, truth to say, I have never understood the kind of thrift they recommend. I wanted to pay my tribute to the sea, its ships and its men, to whom I remain indebted for so much which has gone to make me what I am. That seemed to me the only shape in which I could offer it to their shades. There could not be a question in my mind of anything else. It is quite possible that I am a bad economist; but it is certain that I am incorrigible.
While these reflective pieces were being published in a series, I was criticized for poor financial sense; as if writing like this was just a form of self-indulgence wasting material for future books. It seems I’m not literary enough. A man who didn’t write anything for publication until he was thirty-six struggles to see his life and experiences, the total of his thoughts, feelings, memories, and regrets, and all of his past, as nothing more than raw material to work with. Three years ago, when I published "The Mirror of the Sea," a book of impressions and memories, I received similar comments. Practical comments. But honestly, I’ve never grasped their idea of thrift. I wanted to pay my respect to the sea, its ships, and its people, to whom I owe so much that has shaped who I am. That seemed to me the only way I could honor their memory. There’s no question in my mind about anything else. I might be a poor economist; however, it’s clear that I am unchangeable.
Having matured in the surroundings and under the special conditions of sea life, I have a special piety toward that form of my past; for its impressions were vivid, its appeal direct, its demands such as could be responded to with the natural elation of youth and strength equal to the call. There was nothing in them to perplex a young conscience. Having broken away from my origins under a storm of blame from every quarter which had the merest shadow of right to voice an opinion, removed by great distances from such natural affections as were still left to me, and even estranged, in a measure, from them by the totally unintelligible character of the life which had seduced me so mysteriously from my allegiance, I may safely say that through the blind force of circumstances the sea was to be all my world and the merchant service my only home for a long succession of years. No wonder, then, that in my two exclusively sea books—"The Nigger of the Narcissus," and "The Mirror of the Sea" (and in the few short sea stories like "Youth" and "Typhoon")—I have tried with an almost filial regard to render the vibration of life in the great world of waters, in the hearts of the simple men who have for ages traversed its solitudes, and also that something sentient which seems to dwell in ships—the creatures of their hands and the objects of their care.
Having grown up in the unique environment and conditions of life at sea, I have a deep respect for that part of my past; its experiences were intense, its connections straightforward, and its demands were ones I could meet with the natural excitement of youth and the strength to rise to the challenge. There was nothing in them that would confuse a young conscience. Having escaped my roots amid a storm of criticism from everyone who had even a slight right to judge, separated by vast distances from the natural affections that remained, and somewhat alienated from them due to the completely incomprehensible nature of the life that had so mysteriously drawn me away from my loyalty, I can confidently say that, due to the force of circumstances, the sea became my entire world and the merchant service my only home for many years to come. It’s no surprise, then, that in my two main books about the sea—"The Nigger of the Narcissus" and "The Mirror of the Sea" (along with a few short stories like "Youth" and "Typhoon")—I have tried with a near-familial affection to capture the essence of life in the vast ocean, in the hearts of the simple men who have navigated its emptiness for ages, and also that sense of awareness that seems to reside in ships—the creations of their hands and the focus of their care.
One's literary life must turn frequently for sustenance to memories and seek discourse with the shades, unless one has made up one's mind to write only in order to reprove mankind for what it is, or praise it for what it is not, or—generally—to teach it how to behave. Being neither quarrelsome, nor a flatterer, nor a sage, I have done none of these things, and I am prepared to put up serenely with the insignificance which attaches to persons who are not meddlesome in some way or other. But resignation is not indifference. I would not like to be left standing as a mere spectator on the bank of the great stream carrying onward so many lives. I would fain claim for myself the faculty of so much insight as can be expressed in a voice of sympathy and compassion.
One's literary life often needs to draw from memories and engage with the past, unless someone chooses to write only to criticize humanity for what it is, or to praise it for what it isn't, or—generally—to teach it how to act. Not being argumentative, flattering, or wise, I haven't done any of those things, and I’m ready to calmly accept the lack of significance that comes with not being involved in some way. But acceptance isn’t indifference. I wouldn’t want to be just a bystander along the river of so many lives. I wish to have enough insight to express sympathy and compassion.
It seems to me that in one, at least, authoritative quarter of criticism I am suspected of a certain unemotional, grim acceptance of facts—of what the French would call sécheresse du cœur. Fifteen years of unbroken silence before praise or blame testify sufficiently to my respect for criticism, that fine flower of personal expression in the garden of letters. But this is more of a personal matter, reaching the man behind the work, and therefore it may be alluded to in a volume which is a personal note in the margin of the public page. Not that I feel hurt in the least. The charge—if it amounted to a charge at all—was made in the most considerate terms; in a tone of regret.
It seems to me that at least one respected part of the criticism world finds me suspected of being somewhat unemotional and grim in accepting facts—what the French would call sécheresse du cœur. Fifteen years of not responding to praise or blame show my respect for criticism, that beautiful expression of individuality in the literary world. But this is more of a personal issue, reaching the person behind the work, so it may be mentioned in a book that serves as a personal note in the margin of the public page. Not that I feel hurt at all. The accusation—if it can even be called that—was made in very considerate terms; in a tone of regret.
My answer is that if it be true that every novel contains an element of autobiography—and this can hardly be denied, since the creator can only express himself in his creation—then there are some of us to whom an open display of sentiment is repugnant. I would not unduly praise the virtue of restraint. It is often merely temperamental. But it is not always a sign of coldness. It may be pride. There can be nothing more humiliating than to see the shaft of one's emotion miss the mark of either laughter or tears. Nothing more humiliating! And this for the reason that should the mark be missed, should the open display of emotion fail to move, then it must perish unavoidably in disgust or contempt. No artist can be reproached for shrinking from a risk which only fools run to meet and only genius dare confront with impunity. In a task which mainly consists in laying one's soul more or less bare to the world, a regard for decency, even at the cost of success, is but the regard for one's own dignity which is inseparably united with the dignity of one's work.
My response is that if it's true that every novel has an element of autobiography—and this can hardly be denied since the creator can only express themselves through their creation—then there are some of us for whom an open display of emotion is uncomfortable. I wouldn’t overly praise the value of restraint. It’s often just a matter of personality. But it doesn’t always mean someone is cold. It could be pride. There’s nothing more embarrassing than watching your emotions fall flat, whether it’s missing the chance for laughter or tears. Nothing more embarrassing! The reason being, if you miss the mark, if your open display of emotion fails to resonate, it will inevitably end in disgust or contempt. No artist should be blamed for shying away from a risk that only fools rush to take and only genius can tackle without fear. In a job that primarily involves exposing one's soul to the world, a respect for decency, even if it means sacrificing success, is a respect for one's dignity, which is inseparably linked to the dignity of one's work.
And then—it is very difficult to be wholly joyous or wholly sad on this earth. The comic, when it is human, soon takes upon itself a face of pain; and some of our griefs (some only, not all, for it is the capacity for suffering which makes man august in the eyes of men) have their source in weaknesses which must be recognized with smiling compassion as the common inheritance of us all. Joy and sorrow in this world pass into each other, mingling their forms and their murmurs in the twilight of life as mysterious as an overshadowed ocean, while the dazzling brightness of supreme hopes lies far off, fascinating and still, on the distant edge of the horizon.
And then—it's really hard to be completely happy or completely sad in this world. The funny moments, when they're genuine, quickly show a hint of pain; and some of our sorrows (only some, not all, because it's our ability to feel pain that gives us dignity in the eyes of others) come from weaknesses we need to acknowledge with kind understanding as something we all share. Joy and sorrow in this world blend into each other, mixing their shapes and sounds in the twilight of life, as mysterious as a shadowy ocean, while the bright glow of our greatest hopes lies far away, captivating and still, on the distant horizon.
Yes! I, too, would like to hold the magic wand giving that command over laughter and tears which is declared to be the highest achievement of imaginative literature. Only, to be a great magician one must surrender oneself to occult and irresponsible powers, either outside or within one's breast. We have all heard of simple men selling their souls for love or power to some grotesque devil. The most ordinary intelligence can perceive without much reflection that anything of the sort is bound to be a fool's bargain. I don't lay claim to particular wisdom because of my dislike and distrust of such transactions. It may be my sea training acting upon a natural disposition to keep good hold on the one thing really mine, but the fact is that I have a positive horror of losing even for one moving moment that full possession of myself which is the first condition of good service. And I have earned my notion of good service from my earlier into my later existence. I, who have never sought in the written word anything else but a form of the Beautiful—I have carried over that article of creed from the decks of ships to the more circumscribed space of my desk, and by that act, I suppose, I have become permanently imperfect in the eyes of the ineffable company of pure esthetes.
Yes! I, too, want to hold the magic wand that gives me control over laughter and tears, which is said to be the pinnacle of imaginative literature. However, to be a great magician, one has to surrender to mysterious and reckless powers, whether they are external or within one's heart. We've all heard stories of simple people selling their souls for love or power to some ridiculous devil. Anyone with ordinary intelligence can see that this kind of deal is certainly a foolish trade. I don’t claim to have special wisdom because I dislike and distrust such arrangements. It might be my maritime training combined with a natural tendency to hold on tight to the one thing that truly belongs to me, but the truth is that I have a strong fear of losing even for a moment that complete control over myself, which is essential for good service. I’ve gained my understanding of good service throughout my life. I, who have never sought in written words anything other than a form of beauty—I’ve carried that belief from the decks of ships to the more limited space of my desk, and by doing so, I suppose I’ve made myself permanently imperfect in the eyes of the sublime company of true aesthetes.
As in political so in literary action a man wins friends for himself mostly by the passion of his prejudices and by the consistent narrowness of his outlook. But I have never been able to love what was not lovable or hate what was not hateful out of deference for some general principle. Whether there be any courage in making this admission I know not. After the middle turn of life's way we consider dangers and joys with a tranquil mind. So I proceed in peace to declare that I have always suspected in the effort to bring into play the extremities of emotions the debasing touch of insincerity. In order to move others deeply we must deliberately allow ourselves to be carried away beyond the bounds of our normal sensibility—innocently enough, perhaps, and of necessity, like an actor who raises his voice on the stage above the pitch of natural conversation—but still we have to do that. And surely this is no great sin. But the danger lies in the writer becoming the victim of his own exaggeration, losing the exact notion of sincerity, and in the end coming to despise truth itself as something too cold, too blunt for his purpose—as, in fact, not good enough for his insistent emotion. From laughter and tears the descent is easy to snivelling and giggles.
Just like in politics, in literature a person mostly gains friends through the intensity of their prejudices and their consistent narrow-mindedness. But I've never been able to love what isn’t lovable or hate what isn’t hateful just to align with some general principle. I’m not sure if there’s any bravery in admitting this. After we reach the halfway point in life, we tend to view dangers and joys with a calm mind. So, I move forward to express that I've always been wary of those who, in trying to evoke extreme emotions, resort to a degrading level of insincerity. To truly move others, we must intentionally let ourselves be swept away beyond our normal feelings—maybe innocently, like an actor who has to project their voice on stage beyond natural conversation—but we still have to do that. This isn't a major sin. However, there is a risk that the writer can become a victim of their own exaggeration, losing sight of genuine sincerity, and ultimately coming to disdain truth itself as something too cold and blunt for their purpose—not good enough for their overwhelming emotions. From laughter and tears, it's a quick slide into sniffles and giggles.
These may seem selfish considerations; but you can't, in sound morals, condemn a man for taking care of his own integrity. It is his clear duty. And least of all can you condemn an artist pursuing, however humbly and imperfectly, a creative aim. In that interior world where his thought and his emotions go seeking for the experience of imagined adventures, there are no policemen, no law, no pressure of circumstance or dread of opinion to keep him within bounds. Who then is going to say Nay to his temptations if not his conscience?
These might seem like selfish thoughts, but you can't really blame someone for wanting to maintain their own integrity. It's their clear duty. And you definitely can't criticize an artist who is, even in a humble and imperfect way, pursuing a creative goal. In the private space where their thoughts and feelings explore imagined adventures, there are no rules, no laws, no pressures from circumstances or fears of judgment to hold them back. So who else will keep them in check if not their conscience?
And besides—this, remember, is the place and the moment of perfectly open talk—I think that all ambitions are lawful except those which climb upward on the miseries or credulities of mankind. All intellectual and artistic ambitions are permissible, up to and even beyond the limit of prudent sanity. They can hurt no one. If they are mad, then so much the worse for the artist. Indeed, as virtue is said to be, such ambitions are their own reward. Is it such a very mad presumption to believe in the sovereign power of one's art, to try for other means, for other ways of affirming this belief in the deeper appeal of one's work? To try to go deeper is not to be insensible. A historian of hearts is not a historian of emotions, yet he penetrates further, restrained as he may be, since his aim is to reach the wry fount of laughter and tears. The sight of human affairs deserves admiration and pity. They are worthy of respect, too. And he is not insensible who pays them the undemonstrative tribute of a sigh which is not a sob, and of a smile which is not a grin. Resignation, not mystic, not detached, but resignation open-eyed, conscious, and informed by love, is the only one of our feelings for which it is impossible to become a sham.
And besides—remember, this is the time and place for completely honest conversation—I think that all ambitions are valid except for those that rise on the suffering or gullibility of others. All intellectual and artistic ambitions are acceptable, even beyond what’s considered rational. They can’t truly harm anyone. If they seem crazy, then that’s the artist's problem. In fact, like virtue, these ambitions are their own reward. Is it really such a crazy assumption to trust in the ultimate power of one’s art, to seek other means and ways to affirm this belief in the deeper impact of one’s work? Trying to go deeper doesn’t mean being indifferent. A historian of hearts isn’t a historian of emotions, yet he goes deeper, even if he holds back, because his goal is to reach the bittersweet source of laughter and tears. The landscape of human experiences deserves admiration and compassion. They’re also deserving of respect. And someone who pays this quiet tribute with a sigh—not a sob—and a smile—not a grin—is certainly not indifferent. Resignation, not mystical or detached, but open-eyed, aware, and driven by love, is the only feeling that cannot be faked.
Not that I think resignation the last word of wisdom. I am too much the creature of my time for that. But I think that the proper wisdom is to will what the gods will without, perhaps, being certain what their will is—or even if they have a will of their own. And in this matter of life and art it is not the Why that matters so much to our happiness as the How. As the Frenchman said, "Il y a toujours la manière." Very true. Yes. There is the manner. The manner in laughter, in tears, in irony, in indignations and enthusiasms, in judgments—and even in love. The manner in which, as in the features and character of a human face, the inner truth is foreshadowed for those who know how to look at their kind.
Not that I think resignation is the final word on wisdom. I'm too much a product of my time for that. But I believe the true wisdom is to accept what the gods intend, even if we're not sure what that is—or if they even have intentions at all. In the matters of life and art, it's not the Why that contributes most to our happiness, but the How. As the Frenchman said, "Il y a toujours la manière." Very true. Yes. There is a way. The way in laughter, in tears, in irony, in indignation and enthusiasm, in judgments—and even in love. The way in which, much like the features and character of a human face, the inner truth is revealed for those who know how to see it in others.
Those who read me know my conviction that the world, the temporal world, rests on a few very simple ideas; so simple that they must be as old as the hills. It rests notably, among others, on the idea of Fidelity. At a time when nothing which is not revolutionary in some way or other can expect to attract much attention I have not been revolutionary in my writings. The revolutionary spirit is mighty convenient in this, that it frees one from all scruples as regards ideas. Its hard, absolute optimism is repulsive to my mind by the menace of fanaticism and intolerance it contains. No doubt one should smile at these things; but, imperfect Esthete, I am no better Philosopher. All claim to special righteousness awakens in me that scorn and anger from which a philosophical mind should be free.
Those who read me know I believe the world, the real world, is based on a few very simple ideas; so simple that they must be as old as time. It particularly relies, among other things, on the idea of Fidelity. At a time when nothing that isn’t revolutionary in some way can hope to grab much attention, I haven’t been revolutionary in my writing. The revolutionary spirit is really convenient because it frees one from any scruples about ideas. Its harsh, absolute optimism repels me because of the threat of fanaticism and intolerance it carries. Certainly, one should laugh at these things; but, imperfect as I am, I am no better Philosopher. Any claim to special righteousness awakens in me a scorn and anger that a philosophical mind should be free from.
ON DRAWING
By A.P. Herbert
A. P. Herbert is one of the most brilliant of the younger English writers, and has done remarkable work in fields apparently incompatible: light verse, humorous drolleries, and a beautifully written tragic novel, The Secret Battle. This last was unquestionably one of the most powerful books born of the War, but its sale was tragically small. The House by the River, a later book, was also an amazingly competent and original tale, apparently cast along the lines of the conventional "mystery story," but really a study of selfishness and cowardice done with startling irony and intensity.
A. P. Herbert is one of the most talented younger English writers and has done impressive work in fields that seem incompatible: light poetry, humorous pieces, and a beautifully written tragic novel, The Secret Battle. This novel was undeniably one of the most powerful books to emerge from the War, but its sales were unfortunately minimal. The House by the River, a later work, was also an incredibly skilled and original story, seemingly following the typical "mystery story" format, but in reality, it’s a deep exploration of selfishness and cowardice presented with striking irony and intensity.
Mr. Herbert went to Winchester School and New College, Oxford, where he took his degree in 1914. He saw military service at the Dardanelles and in France, and is now on the staff of Punch. There is no young writer in England from whom one may more confidently expect a continuance of fine work. This airy and delicious little absurdity is a perfect example of what a genuine humorist can do.
Mr. Herbert attended Winchester School and New College, Oxford, where he earned his degree in 1914. He served in the military at the Dardanelles and in France, and he is currently on the staff of Punch. There is no young writer in England from whom we can more confidently anticipate a continuation of great work. This light-hearted and delightful little absurdity is a perfect example of what a true humorist can achieve.
If there is still any one in doubt as to the value of the oldfashioned classical training in forming a lusty prose style, let him examine Mr. Herbert's The Secret Battle. This book often sounds oddly like a translation from vigorous Greek—e.g., Herodotus. It is lucid, compact, logical, rich in telling epithet, informal and swift. If these are not the cardinal prose virtues, what are?
If anyone still doubts the value of traditional classical training in developing a strong prose style, they should read Mr. Herbert's The Secret Battle. This book often feels like it's translated from robust Greek—think Herodotus. It's clear, concise, logical, rich in significant descriptions, informal, and quick-paced. If these aren’t the essential virtues of prose, then what are?
IT is commonly said that everybody can sing in the bathroom; and this is true. Singing is very easy. Drawing, though, is much more difficult. I have devoted a good deal of time to Drawing, one way and another; I have to attend a great many committees and public meetings, and at such functions I find that Drawing is almost the only Art one can satisfactorily pursue during the speeches. One really cannot sing during the speeches; so as a rule I draw. I do not say that I am an expert yet, but after a few more meetings I calculate that I shall know Drawing as well as it can be known.
IT is often said that everyone can sing in the shower, and this is true. Singing is really easy. However, drawing is much harder. I've spent a lot of time on drawing in various ways. I have to go to a lot of committees and public meetings, and at those events, I find that drawing is almost the only art you can successfully do while the speeches are happening. You really can't sing during the speeches, so usually, I just draw. I'm not saying I'm an expert yet, but after a few more meetings, I figure I'll know drawing as well as anyone can.
The first thing, of course, is to get on to a really good committee; and by a good committee I mean a committee that provides decent materials. An ordinary departmental committee is no use: generally they only give you a couple of pages of lined foolscap and no white blotting-paper, and very often the pencils are quite soft. White blotting-paper is essential. I know of no material the spoiling of which gives so much artistic pleasure—except perhaps snow. Indeed, if I was asked to choose between making pencil-marks on a sheet of white blotting-paper and making foot-marks on a sheet of white snow I should be in a thingummy.
The first thing, of course, is to get on a really good committee; and by a good committee, I mean a committee that provides quality materials. An average departmental committee isn’t helpful: they usually just give you a couple of pages of lined paper and no white blotting paper, and often the pencils are too soft. White blotting paper is crucial. I don’t know any material that’s more satisfying to mess up—except maybe snow. In fact, if I had to choose between making pencil marks on a sheet of white blotting paper and making footprints on a snowy surface, I’d really be in a tough spot.
Much the best committees from the point of view of material are committees about business which meet at business premises—shipping offices, for choice. One of the Pacific Lines has the best white blotting-paper I know; and the pencils there are a dream. I am sure the directors of that firm are Drawers; for they always give you two pencils, one hard for doing noses, and one soft for doing hair.
The best committees for materials are those that meet in business locations—preferably shipping offices. One of the Pacific Lines has the best white blotting paper I know of, and their pencils are amazing. I'm sure the directors of that company are artists because they always provide two pencils: one hard for sketching noses and one soft for drawing hair.
When you have selected your committee and the speeches are well away, the Drawing begins. Much the best thing to draw is a man. Not the chairman, or Lord Pommery Quint, or any member of the committee, but just A Man. Many novices make the mistake of selecting a subject for their Art before they begin; usually they select the chairman. And when they find it is more like Mr. Gladstone they are discouraged. If they had waited a little it could have been Mr. Gladstone officially.
When you've chosen your committee and the speeches are underway, the drawing begins. The best thing to draw is a man. Not the chairman, or Lord Pommery Quint, or any committee member, just a man. Many beginners make the mistake of picking a subject for their art before starting; they often choose the chairman. Then, when they realize it looks more like Mr. Gladstone, they get discouraged. If they had waited a bit, it could have genuinely been Mr. Gladstone.
As a rule I begin with the forehead and work down to the chin (Fig. 1).
As a rule, I start with the forehead and move down to the chin (Fig. 1).
When I have done the outline I put in the eye. This is one of the most difficult parts of Drawing; one is never quite sure where the eye goes. If, however, it is not a good eye, a useful tip is to give the man spectacles; this generally makes him a clergyman, but it helps the eye (Fig. 2).
When I've finished the outline, I add the eye. This is one of the toughest parts of drawing; you can never be completely certain where the eye should go. However, if it's not a good eye, a helpful trick is to give the person glasses; this usually makes him look like a clergyman, but it does improve the eye (Fig. 2).
Now you have to outline the rest of the head, and this is rather a gamble. Personally, I go in for strong heads (Fig. 3).
Now you need to sketch out the rest of the head, and this is quite a risk. Personally, I prefer bold heads (Fig. 3).
The next thing to do is to put in the ear; and once you have done this the rest is easy. Ears are much more difficult than eyes (Fig. 4).
The next step is to insert the ear; and once you've done that, the rest is straightforward. Ears are much trickier than eyes (Fig. 4).
I hope that is right. It seems to me to be a little too far to the southward. But it is done now. And once you have put in the ear you can't go back; not unless you are on a very good committee which provides india-rubber as well as pencils.
I hope that's correct. It feels to me like it's a bit too far south. But it's done now. And once you've made a decision, you can't undo it; not unless you're on a really good committee that supplies erasers along with pencils.
Now I do the hair. Hair may either be very fuzzy or black, or lightish and thin. It depends chiefly on what sort of pencils are provided. For myself I prefer black hair, because then the parting shows up better (Fig. 5).
Now I style the hair. Hair can be really fluffy or black, or light and thin. It mainly depends on what kind of pencils are available. Personally, I prefer black hair because the parting stands out better (Fig. 5).
Until one draws hair one never realizes what large heads people have. Doing the hair takes the whole of a speech, usually, even one of the chairman's speeches.
Until you start doing hair, you never really notice how big people's heads are. Doing hair usually takes the entire duration of a speech, often even the chairman's speeches.
This is not one of my best men; I am sure the ear is in the wrong place. And I am inclined to think he ought to have spectacles. Only then he would be a clergyman, and I have decided that he is Mr. Philip Gibbs at the age of twenty. So he must carry on with his eye as it is.
This isn't one of my best men; I'm pretty sure his ear is in the wrong place. And I think he should wear glasses. But if he did, then he would be a clergyman, and I've decided that he is Mr. Philip Gibbs at twenty. So he has to manage with his eye as it is.
There, you see (Fig. 6)? The one on the right is a Bolshevik; he has a low forehead and beetling brows—a most unpleasant man. Yet he has a powerful face. The one on the left was meant to be another Bolshevik, arguing with him. But he has turned out to be a lady, so I have had to give her a "bun." She is a lady solicitor; but I don't know how she came to be talking to the Bolshevik.
There, do you see that (Fig. 6)? The one on the right is a Bolshevik; he has a low forehead and heavy brows—a really unpleasant guy. But he has a strong face. The one on the left was supposed to be another Bolshevik arguing with him. But it turns out to be a woman, so I had to give her a "bun." She's a lady lawyer, but I have no idea how she ended up talking to the Bolshevik.
When you have learned how to do men, the only other things in Drawing are Perspective and Landscape.
When you know how to draw people, the only other things left in drawing are perspective and landscapes.
PERSPECTIVE is great fun: the best thing to do is a long French road with telegraph poles (Fig. 7).
PERSPECTIVE is a lot of fun: the best thing to do is a long French road with telephone poles (Fig. 7).
I have put in a fence as well.
I’ve put up a fence too.
LANDSCAPE is chiefly composed of hills and trees. Trees are the most amusing, especially fluffy trees.
LANDSCAPE mainly consists of hills and trees. Trees are the most entertaining, especially fluffy ones.
Here is a Landscape (Fig. 8).
Here is a Landscape (Fig. 8).
But it takes a very long speech to get an ambitious piece of work like this through.
But it takes a really long speech to get an ambitious project like this done.
O. HENRY
By O. W. Firkins
Several years ago I turned to Who's Who in America in hope of finding some information about O. W. Firkins, whose brilliant reviews—chiefly of poetry—were appearing in The Nation. I found no entry, but every few months I would again rummage that stout red volume with the same intention, forgetting that I had done so before without success. It seemed hardly credible that a critic so brilliant had been overlooked by the industrious compilers of that work, which includes hundreds of hacks and fourflushers. When gathering the contents of this book I tried Who's Who again, still without result. I wrote to Mr. Firkins pleading for biographical details; modestly, but firmly, he denied me.
Several years ago, I looked up Who's Who in America hoping to find some information about O. W. Firkins, whose amazing reviews—mostly of poetry—were being published in The Nation. I couldn’t find any entry, but every few months I would search through that thick red book again, forgetting that I had already tried it without any luck. It seemed unbelievable that a critic as talented as he had been missed by the hardworking editors of that book, which includes hundreds of mediocre writers and pretenders. When compiling the contents of this book, I checked Who's Who again, still with no success. I wrote to Mr. Firkins asking for biographical details; modestly yet firmly, he declined.
So all I can tell you is this, that Mr. Firkins is to my mind one of the half-dozen most sparkling critics in this country. One sometimes feels that he is carried a little past his destination by the sheer gusto and hilarity of his antitheses and paradoxes. That is not so, however, in this essay about O. Henry, an author who has often been grotesquely mispraised (I did not say overpraised) by people incompetent to appreciate his true greatness. Mr. Robert Cortes Holliday, in an essay called "The Amazing Failure of O. Henry," said that O. Henry created no memorable characters. Mr. Firkins suggests the obvious but satisfying answer—New York itself is his triumph. The New York of O. Henry, already almost erased physically, remains a personality and an identity.
All I can say is this: Mr. Firkins is one of the top six most insightful critics in this country. Sometimes it seems he gets a bit carried away by the excitement and humor of his contradictions and paradoxes. However, that's not the case in this essay about O. Henry, an author who has often been absurdly mispraised (I didn't say overpraised) by those who can't truly appreciate his greatness. Mr. Robert Cortes Holliday, in an essay titled "The Amazing Failure of O. Henry," claimed that O. Henry created no memorable characters. Mr. Firkins offers the clear but satisfying response—New York itself is his greatest achievement. The New York of O. Henry, which is now almost physically gone, still exists as a personality and identity.
Mr. Firkins is professor of English at the University of Minnesota, and a contributing editor of The Weekly Review, in which this essay first appeared in September, 1919. The footnotes are, of course, his own.
Mr. Firkins is a professor of English at the University of Minnesota and a contributing editor of The Weekly Review, where this essay was first published in September 1919. The footnotes are, of course, his own.
THERE are two opinions concerning O. Henry. The middle class views him as the impersonation of vigor and brilliancy; part of the higher criticism sees in him little but sensation and persiflage. Between these views there is a natural relation; the gods of the heathens are ipso facto the demons of Christianity. Unmixed assertions, however, are commonly mixtures of truth and falsehood; there is room to-day for an estimate which shall respect both opinions and adopt neither.
THERE are two opinions about O. Henry. The middle class sees him as a symbol of energy and brilliance, while some from the higher criticism view him as mostly just sensationalism and shallow wit. There is a natural connection between these perspectives; the gods of the heathens are ipso facto the demons of Christianity. However, straightforward claims are often a mix of truth and falsehood; today, there's space for an evaluation that acknowledges both opinions without fully embracing either.
There is one literary trait in which I am unable to name any writer of tales in any literature who surpasses O. Henry.[B] It is not primary or even secondary among literary merits; it is less a value per se than the condition or foundation of values. But its utility is manifest, and it is rare among men: Chaucer and Shakespeare prove the possibility of its absence in masters of that very branch of art in which its presence would seem to be imperative. I refer to the designing of stories—not to the primary intuition or to skill in development, in both of which finer phases of invention O. Henry has been largely and frequently surpassed, but to the disposition of masses, to the blocking-out of plots. That a half-educated American provincial should have been original in a field in which original men have been copyists is enough of itself to make his personality observable.
There’s one writing trait where I can't think of any storyteller in any literature who surpasses O. Henry.[B] It’s not the most important or even a secondary literary merit; it’s more of a foundation for values than a value itself. But its usefulness is clear, and it’s rare among people: Chaucer and Shakespeare show that even masters of this art can lack it when it seems essential. I’m talking about story design—not about the initial insight or skill in development, where O. Henry has often been outdone, but about how stories are organized, about plotting. The fact that a somewhat educated American from a small town could be original in a field where original people often imitate is enough to make his character stand out.
Illustration, even of conceded truths, is rarely superfluous. I supply two instances. Two lads, parting in New York, agree to meet "After Twenty Years" at a specified hour, date, and corner. Both are faithful; but the years in which their relation has slept in mutual silence and ignorance have turned the one into a dashing criminal, the other into a sober officer of the law. Behind the picturesque and captivating rendezvous lurks a powerful dramatic situation and a moral problem of arresting gravity. This is dealt with in six pages of the "Four Million." The "Furnished Room," two stories further on, occupies twelve pages. Through the wilderness of apartments on the lower West Side a man trails a woman. Chance leads him to the very room in which the woman ended her life the week before. Between him and the truth the avarice of a sordid landlady interposes the curtain of a lie. In the bed in which the girl slept and died, the man sleeps and dies, and the entrance of the deadly fumes into his nostrils shuts the sinister and mournful coincidence forever from the knowledge of mankind. O. Henry gave these tales neither extension nor prominence; so far as I know, they were received without bravos or salvos. The distinction of a body of work in which such specimens are undistinguished hardly requires comment.
Illustration, even of accepted truths, is rarely unnecessary. I’ll share two examples. Two guys, parting ways in New York, agree to meet "After Twenty Years" at a specific time, date, and corner. Both are loyal; however, the years spent in mutual silence and lack of awareness have transformed one into a charming criminal and the other into a responsible law officer. Behind the intriguing and appealing meeting, there lies a powerful dramatic situation and a serious moral dilemma. This is explored in six pages of "Four Million." The "Furnished Room," two stories later, takes twelve pages. Amid the maze of apartments on the lower West Side, a man follows a woman. Fate brings him to the very room where the woman took her life just a week earlier. Between him and the truth, the greed of a sleazy landlady puts up the barrier of a lie. In the bed where the girl slept and died, the man sleeps and ultimately dies, as the deadly fumes entering his nostrils forever hide the grim and sorrowful coincidence from the world. O. Henry didn’t give these stories much length or attention; to my knowledge, they were received without cheers or applause. The significance of a body of work where such pieces are unremarkable hardly needs further explanation.
A few types among these stories may be specified. There are the Sydney Cartonisms, defined in the name; love-stories in which divided hearts, or simply divided persons, are brought together by the strategy of chance; hoax stories—deft pictures of smiling roguery; "prince and pauper" stories, in which wealth and poverty face each other, sometimes enact each other; disguise stories, in which the wrong clothes often draw the wrong bullets; complemental stories, in which Jim sacrifices his beloved watch to buy combs for Della, who, meanwhile, has sacrificed her beloved hair to buy a chain for Jim.
A few types of these stories can be pointed out. There are the Sydney Cartonisms, named for that character; love stories where divided hearts, or simply divided people, come together by chance; hoax stories—clever depictions of playful trickery; "prince and pauper" stories, where wealth and poverty confront each other, sometimes taking on each other's roles; disguise stories, where the wrong outfit often leads to dangerous misunderstandings; and complemental stories, like when Jim gives up his treasured watch to buy combs for Della, who, in turn, has cut off her beloved hair to buy a chain for Jim.
This imperfect list is eloquent in its way; it smooths our path to the assertion that O. Henry's specialty is the enlistment of original method in the service of traditional appeals. The ends are the ends of fifty years ago; O. Henry transports us by aeroplane to the old homestead.[C]
This imperfect list speaks volumes in its own way; it clears the way for us to assert that O. Henry's talent lies in using original methods to serve traditional themes. The goals remain the same as they were fifty years ago; O. Henry takes us flying back to the old homestead.[C]
Criticism of O. Henry falls into those superlatives and antitheses in which his own faculty delighted. In mechanical invention he is almost the leader of his race. In a related quality—a defect—his leadership is even more conspicuous. I doubt if the sense of the probable, or, more precisely, of the available in the improbable, ever became equally weakened or deadened in a man who made his living by its exercise. The improbable, even the impossible, has its place in art, though that place is relatively low; and it is curious that works such as the "Arabian Nights" and Grimm's fairy tales, whose stock-in-trade is the incredible, are the works which give almost no trouble on the score of verisimilitude. The truth is that we reject not what it is impossible to prove, or even what it is possible to disprove, but what it is impossible to imagine. O. Henry asks us to imagine the unimaginable—that is his crime.
Criticism of O. Henry often gets caught up in the extremes and contradictions that he himself enjoyed. In terms of creativity, he is almost the top of his field. In a related area—a flaw—his leadership is even more evident. I doubt anyone’s sense of what’s possible, or more precisely, what’s feasible in the impossible, ever became as weak or numb as his, especially considering he made his living through it. The improbable, even the impossible, has its place in art, though that place is fairly limited; it’s interesting that works like the "Arabian Nights" and Grimm's fairy tales, which are full of the unbelievable, cause almost no issues when it comes to realism. The fact is, we don’t reject what is impossible to prove, or even what can be disproved, but what we can’t even imagine. O. Henry challenges us to envision the unimaginable—that’s his flaw.
The right and wrong improbabilities may be illustrated from two burglar stories. "Sixes and Sevens" contains an excellent tale of a burglar and a citizen who fraternize, in a comic midnight interview, on the score of their common sufferings from rheumatism. This feeling in practice would not triumph over fear and greed; but the feeling is natural, and everybody with a grain of nature in him can imagine its triumph. Nature tends towards that impossibility, and art, lifting, so to speak, the lid which fact drops upon nature, reveals nature in belying fact. In another story, in "Whirligigs," a nocturnal interview takes place in which a burglar and a small boy discuss the etiquette of their mutual relation by formulas derived from short stories with which both are amazingly conversant. This is the wrong use of the improbable. Even an imagination inured to the virtues of burglars and the maturity of small boys will have naught to do with this insanity.
The right and wrong improbabilities can be illustrated with two burglar stories. "Sixes and Sevens" features a great tale about a burglar and a citizen who bond during a funny midnight meeting, sharing their struggles with rheumatism. In reality, this sentiment wouldn’t overcome fear and greed; however, it’s a natural feeling, and anyone with a bit of empathy can envision its success. Nature leans toward that impossibility, and art, so to speak, lifting the lid that reality puts on nature, reveals nature in defiance of fact. In another story, "Whirligigs," a nighttime meeting occurs in which a burglar and a small boy discuss the etiquette of their relationship using rules derived from short stories they both surprisingly know well. This is the wrong use of the improbable. Even a mind accustomed to the virtues of burglars and the wisdom of small boys won’t engage with this craziness.
But O. Henry can go further yet. There are inventions in his tales the very utterance of which—not the mere substance but the utterance—on the part of a man not writing from Bedlam or for Bedlam impresses the reader as incredible. In a "Comedy in Rubber," two persons become so used to spectatorship at transactions in the street that they drift into the part of spectators when the transaction is their own wedding. Can human daring or human folly go further? O. Henry is on the spot to prove that they can. In the "Romance of a Busy Broker," a busy and forgetful man, in a freak of absent-mindedness, offers his hand to the stenographer whom he had married the night before.
But O. Henry takes it even further. The ideas in his stories—it's not just the content but the way they're expressed by someone who isn’t writing from a mental institution or for one—leave the reader in disbelief. In "Comedy in Rubber," two people get so accustomed to watching events unfold on the street that they end up being spectators when the event is their own wedding. Can human boldness or stupidity go any further? O. Henry is right there to show that they can. In "Romance of a Busy Broker," a busy and forgetful man, in a moment of absent-mindedness, offers his hand to the stenographer he married the night before.
The other day, in the journal of the Goncourts, I came upon the following sentence: "Never will the imagination approach the improbabilities and the antitheses of truth" (II, 9). This is dated February 21, 1862. Truth had still the advantage. O. Henry was not born till September of the same year.
The other day, in the Goncourt journal, I found this sentence: "The imagination will never match the improbabilities and contradictions of truth" (II, 9). This is dated February 21, 1862. Truth still had the upper hand. O. Henry wasn't born until September of that same year.
Passing on to style, we are still in the land of antithesis. The style is gross—and fine. Of the plenitude of its stimulus, there can be no question. In "Sixes and Sevens," a young man sinking under accidental morphia, is kept awake and alive by shouts, kicks, and blows. O. Henry's public seems imaged in that young man. But I draw a sharp distinction between the tone of the style and its pattern. The tone is brazen, or, better perhaps, brassy; its self-advertisement is incorrigible; it reeks with that air of performance which is opposed to real efficiency. But the pattern is another matter. The South rounds its periods like its vowels; O. Henry has read, not widely, but wisely, in his boyhood. His sentences are built—a rare thing in the best writers of to-day. In conciseness, that Spartan virtue, he was strong, though it must be confessed that the tale-teller was now and then hustled from the rostrum by his rival and enemy, the talker. He can introduce a felicity with a noiselessness that numbers him for a flying second among the sovereigns of English. "In one of the second-floor front windows Mrs. McCaskey awaited her husband. Supper was cooling on the table. Its heat went into Mrs. McCaskey."
Moving on to style, we're still in the realm of opposites. The style is both coarse and refined. There's no doubt about the abundance of its energy. In "Sixes and Sevens," a young man overwhelmed by accidental morphine stays awake and alive through shouts, kicks, and blows. O. Henry's audience seems reflected in that young man. However, I make a clear distinction between the tone of the style and its pattern. The tone is bold, or perhaps better described as brassy; its self-promotion is relentless; it exudes that sense of performance that is contrary to true effectiveness. But the pattern is a different story. The South shapes its sentences like it does its vowels; O. Henry read, not broadly, but wisely, in his youth. His sentences are crafted—a rarity among the best writers today. He was strong in brevity, that Spartan virtue, although it's true that the storyteller was occasionally rushed offstage by his rival and enemy, the talker. He can introduce a cleverness with a subtlety that ranks him briefly among the masters of English. "In one of the second-floor front windows, Mrs. McCaskey waited for her husband. Supper was cooling on the table. Its warmth faded with Mrs. McCaskey."
I regret the tomfoolery; I wince at the slang. Yet even for these levities with which his pages are so liberally besprinkled or bedaubed, some half-apology may be circumspectly urged. In nonsense his ease is consummate. A horseman who should dismount to pick up a bauble would be childish; O. Henry picks it up without dismounting. Slang, again, is most pardonable in the man with whom its use is least exclusive and least necessary. There are men who, going for a walk, take their dogs with them; there are other men who give a walk to their dogs. Substitute slang for the dog, and the superiority of the first class to the second will exactly illustrate the superiority of O. Henry to the abject traffickers in slang.
I regret the foolishness; I cringe at the slang. Yet even for these lighthearted moments that fill his pages, some partial excuse can be cautiously made. In nonsense, his talent is unmatched. A rider who gets off to pick up a trinket would seem childish; O. Henry picks it up without getting off his horse. Slang, after all, is most forgivable in someone who doesn’t rely on it exclusively or need it all the time. Some people take their dogs for a walk, while others just give their dogs a walk. If you swap slang for the dog, the difference in value between the first group and the second perfectly illustrates how much better O. Henry is compared to those who misuse slang.
In the "Pendulum" Katy has a new patch in her crazy quilt which the ice man cut from the end of his four-in-hand. In the "Day We Celebrate," threading the mazes of a banana grove is compared to "paging the palm room of a New York hotel for a man named Smith." O. Henry's is the type of mind to which images like this four-in-hand and this palm room are presented in exhaustless abundance and unflagging continuity. There was hardly an object in the merry-go-round of civilized life that had not offered at least an end or an edge to the avidity of his consuming eyes. Nothing escapes from the besom of his allusiveness, and the style is streaked and pied, almost to monotony, by the accumulation of lively details.
In "Pendulum," Katy has a new patch in her crazy quilt that the ice man cut from the end of his four-in-hand. In "Day We Celebrate," wandering through a banana grove is compared to "going through the palm room of a New York hotel looking for a guy named Smith." O. Henry has a mind where images like this four-in-hand and this palm room come in endless variety and constant flow. There was hardly anything in the colorful carousel of civilized life that didn't offer at least a glimpse to the eager gaze of his insatiable eyes. Nothing escapes the sweep of his allusiveness, and his style is layered and complex, almost to monotony, due to the buildup of vibrant details.
If O. Henry's style was crude, it was also rare; but it is part of the grimness of the bargain that destiny drives with us that the mixture of the crude and the rare should be a crude mixture, as the sons of whites and negroes are numbered with the blacks. In the kingdom of style O. Henry's estates were princely, but, to pay his debts, he must have sold them all.
If O. Henry's style was rough, it was also unique; but it's part of the harsh reality of the deal that fate makes with us that the blend of the rough and the unique should be a rough blend, just as the children of white and black parents are counted among the black. In the realm of style, O. Henry's holdings were grand, but to settle his debts, he must have sold them all.
Thus far in our inquiry extraordinary merits have been offset by extraordinary defects. To lift our author out of the class of brilliant and skilful entertainers, more is needed. Is more forthcoming? I should answer, yes. In O. Henry, above the knowledge of setting, which is clear and first-hand, but subsidiary, above the order of events, which is, generally speaking, fantastic, above the emotions, which are sound and warm, but almost purely derivative, there is a rather small, but impressive body of first-hand perspicacities and reactions. On these his endurance may hinge.
So far in our exploration, extraordinary strengths have been balanced by extraordinary weaknesses. To elevate our author beyond the realm of talented and charming entertainers, more is required. Is there more to offer? I would say yes. In O. Henry, beyond the clear and firsthand knowledge of the setting, which is secondary, beyond the generally fantastic sequence of events, beyond the emotions that are genuine and heartfelt but mostly derivative, there exists a rather small yet impressive collection of original insights and responses. His lasting impact may depend on these.
I name, first of all, O. Henry's feeling for New York. With the exception of his New Orleans, I care little for his South and West, which are a boyish South and West, and as little, or even less, for his Spanish-American communities. My objection to his opera-bouffe republics is, not that they are inadequate as republics (for that we were entirely prepared), but that they are inadequate as opera. He lets us see his show from the coulisses. The pretense lacks standing even among pretenses, and a faith must be induced before its removal can enliven us. But his New York has quality. It is of the family of Dickens's London and Hugo's Paris, though it is plainly a cadet in the family. Mr. Howells, in his profound and valuable study of the metropolis in a "Hazard of New Fortunes," is penetrating; O. Henry, on the other hand, is penetrated. His New York is intimate and clinging; it is caught in the mesh of the imagination.
I want to highlight O. Henry's connection to New York. Aside from his New Orleans stories, I’m not really interested in his South and West, which come off as a naive portrayal of those regions, and I care even less about his depictions of Spanish-American communities. My issue with his operatic republics isn’t that they aren't real republics (we were fully aware of that), but that they fail as opera. He shows us his performance from behind the scenes. The act lacks substance even among other acts, and we need to suspend our disbelief before we can truly engage with it. But his New York has depth. It's akin to Dickens's London and Hugo's Paris, although it’s clearly a younger sibling in that comparison. Mr. Howells, in his insightful and important analysis of the city in "A Hazard of New Fortunes," offers a deep look; O. Henry, on the other hand, is more absorbed in his subject. His New York feels personal and immersive; it's woven into the fabric of imagination.
O. Henry had rare but precious insights into human destiny and human nature. In these pictures he is not formally accurate; he could never or seldom set his truth before us in that moderation and proportion which truths acquire in the stringencies of actuality. He was apt to present his insight in a sort of parable or allegory, to upraise it before the eyes of mankind on the mast or flagpole of some vehement exaggeration. Epigram shows us truth in the embrace of a lie, and tales which are dramatized epigrams are subject to a like constraint. The force, however, is real. I could scarcely name anywhere a more powerful exposition of fatality than "Roads of Destiny," the initial story in the volume which appropriates its title. It wanted only the skilled romantic touch of a Gautier or Stevenson to enroll this tale among the masterpieces of its kind in contemporary letters.
O. Henry had unique yet valuable insights into human fate and nature. In his work, he wasn't always formally accurate; he rarely presented his truth in the balanced and measured way that reality demands. He often expressed his insights in the form of a parable or allegory, showcasing them through some intense exaggeration. An epigram reveals truth wrapped in a lie, and stories that are dramatized epigrams face a similar limitation. Still, the impact is genuine. I could hardly point to a more powerful exploration of fate than "Roads of Destiny," the first story in the collection that shares its title. It only needed the skilled touch of a writer like Gautier or Stevenson to earn its place among the masterpieces of contemporary literature.
Now and then the ingredient of parable is hardly perceptible; we draw close to the bare fact. O. Henry, fortunate in plots, is peculiarly fortunate in his renunciation of plot. If contrivance is lucrative, it is also costly. There is an admirable little story called the "Pendulum" (in the "Trimmed Lamp"), the simplicity of whose fable would have satisfied Coppée or Hawthorne. A man in a flat, by force of custom, has come to regard his wife as a piece of furniture. She departs for a few hours, and, by the break in usage, is restored, in his consciousness, to womanhood. She comes back, and relapses into furniture. That is all. O. Henry could not have given us less—or more. Farcical, clownish, if you will, the story resembles those clowns who carry daggers under their motley. When John Perkins takes up that inauspicious hat, the reader smiles, and quails. I will mention a few other examples of insights with the proviso that they are not specially commended to the man whose quest in the short story is the electrifying or the calorific. They include the "Social Triangle," the "Making of a New Yorker," and the "Foreign Policy of Company 99," all in the "Trimmed Lamp," the "Brief Début of Tildy" in the "Four Million," and the "Complete Life of John Hopkins" in the "Voice of the City." I cannot close this summary of good points without a passing reference to the not unsuggestive portrayal of humane and cheerful scoundrels in the "Gentle Grafter." The picture, if false to species, is faithful to genus.
Now and then, the aspect of a parable is barely noticeable; we get close to the simple truth. O. Henry, lucky with his stories, is particularly lucky in forgoing complex plots. While a clever plot can be rewarding, it can also be expensive. There’s a great little story called "Pendulum" (in "Trimmed Lamp") whose simple tale would have pleased Coppée or Hawthorne. A man in an apartment, due to habit, has come to see his wife as just another piece of furniture. She leaves for a few hours, and with the break in routine, she’s brought back to his mind as a woman again. She returns, and he sees her as furniture once more. That's it. O. Henry couldn't have given us less—or more. It's farcical, silly, if you want, like those clowns who hide daggers under their costumes. When John Perkins picks up that unfortunate hat, the reader laughs, but also feels uneasy. I’ll mention a few other examples of insights with the understanding that they aren’t particularly aimed at those looking for excitement or intensity in short stories. They include "Social Triangle," "Making of a New Yorker," and "Foreign Policy of Company 99," all in "Trimmed Lamp," "Brief Début of Tildy" in "Four Million," and "Complete Life of John Hopkins" in "Voice of the City." I can’t wrap up this summary of great points without briefly mentioning the thought-provoking portrayal of kind-hearted but shifty characters in "Gentle Grafter." The depiction, while not true to the genre, is honest to its essence.
O. Henry's egregiousness, on the superficial side, both in merits and defects, reminds us of those park benches so characteristic of his tales which are occupied by a millionaire at one end and a mendicant at the other. But, to complete the image, we must add as a casual visitor to that bench a seer or a student, who, sitting down between the previous comers and suspending the flamboyancies of their dialogue, should gaze with the pensive eye of Goldsmith or Addison upon the passing crowd.
O. Henry's flaws and virtues, at first glance, remind us of those park benches typical of his stories, where a millionaire sits at one end and a beggar at the other. But to complete the picture, we should also include a casual visitor to that bench, a thinker or a scholar, who, sitting between the other two and pausing their flashy conversation, gazes thoughtfully at the passing crowd like Goldsmith or Addison.
In O. Henry American journalism and the Victorian tradition meet. His mind, quick to don the guise of modernity, was impervious to its spirit. The specifically modern movements, the scientific awakening, the religious upheaval and subsidence, the socialistic gospel, the enfranchisement of women—these never interfered with his artless and joyous pursuit of the old romantic motives of love, hate, wealth, poverty, gentility, disguise, and crime. On two points a moral record which, in his literature, is everywhere sound and stainless, rises almost to nobility. In an age when sexual excitement had become available and permissible, this worshiper of stimulus never touched with so much as a fingertip that insidious and meretricious fruit. The second point is his feeling for underpaid working-girls. His passionate concern for this wrong derives a peculiar emphasis from the general refusal of his books to bestow countenance or notice on philanthropy in its collective forms. When, in his dream of Heaven, he is asked: "Are you one of the bunch?" (meaning one of the bunch of grasping and grinding employers), the response, through all its slang, is soul-stirring. "'Not on your immortality,' said I. 'I'm only the fellow that set fire to an orphan asylum and murdered a blind man for his pennies.'" The author of that retort may have some difficulty with the sentries that watch the entrance of Parnassus; he will have none with the gatekeeper of the New Jerusalem.
In O. Henry, American journalism and the Victorian tradition come together. His mind, quick to embrace modernity, remained untouched by its spirit. The distinctly modern movements—the scientific awakening, the religious changes, the rise of socialism, and the empowerment of women—never interfered with his innocent and joyful pursuit of classic romantic themes like love, hate, wealth, poverty, gentility, disguise, and crime. On two fronts, his moral record, which is consistently sound and pure in his literature, rises almost to nobility. In an era when sexual excitement was readily available and accepted, this seeker of stimulation never so much as grazed that insidious and flashy temptation. The second point is his empathy for underpaid working women. His deep concern for this injustice is particularly notable because his books largely avoid supporting or acknowledging philanthropy in its organized forms. When, in his vision of Heaven, he is asked, "Are you one of the bunch?" (referring to the greedy employers), his response, despite its slang, is deeply moving. "'Not on your immortality,' I said. 'I'm just the guy who set fire to an orphanage and killed a blind man for his pennies.'" The author of that comeback may face some challenges with the sentries guarding the entrance to Parnassus; however, he will have no trouble with the gatekeeper of the New Jerusalem.
THE MOWING OF A FIELD
By Hilaire Belloc
We have not had in our time a more natural-born essayist, of the scampering sort, than Hilaire Belloc. He is an infectious fellow: if you read him much you will find yourself trying to imitate him; there is no harm in doing so: he himself caught the trick from Rabelais. I do not propose to rehash here the essay I wrote about him in a book called Shandygaff. You can refer to it there, which will be good business all round. I know it is a worthy essay, for much of it was cribbed from an article by Mr. Thomas Seccombe, which an American paper lifted from the English journal which, presumably, paid Mr. Seccombe for it. I wrote it for the Boston Transcript, where I knew the theft would be undetected; and in shoveling together some stuff for a book (that was in 1917, the cost of living was rising at an angle of forty-five degrees, as so many graphs have shown) I put it in, forgetting (until too late) that some of it was absolute plunder.
We haven't had a more naturally gifted essayist, of the lively type, than Hilaire Belloc. He’s a contagious writer: if you read him a lot, you’ll find yourself wanting to copy his style; there’s nothing wrong with that: he picked it up from Rabelais. I’m not going to repeat here the essay I wrote about him in a book called Shandygaff. You can check it out there, which makes sense for everyone involved. I know it’s a solid essay because much of it was taken from an article by Mr. Thomas Seccombe, which an American paper borrowed from the English journal that presumably paid Mr. Seccombe for it. I wrote it for the Boston Transcript, where I knew the copying would go unnoticed; and while piecing together some material for a book (this was in 1917, when the cost of living was skyrocketing, as many graphs have illustrated), I included it, forgetting (until it was too late) that some of it was outright theft.
Mr. Chesterton once said something like this: "It is a mistake to think that thieves do not respect property. They only wish it to become their property, so that they may more perfectly respect it."
Mr. Chesterton once said something like this: "It's a mistake to think that thieves don't respect property. They just want it to become their property, so they can respect it better."
And by the way, Max Beerbohm's parody of Belloc, in A Christmas Garland, is something not to be missed. It is one of the best proofs that Belloc is a really great artist. Beerbohm does not waste his time mimicking the small fry.
And by the way, Max Beerbohm's parody of Belloc in A Christmas Garland is something you definitely shouldn't miss. It’s one of the best pieces of evidence that Belloc is truly a great artist. Beerbohm doesn’t bother imitating the minor players.
Hilaire Belloc—son of a French father and an English mother; his happy junction of both English and French genius in prose is hereditary—was born in France in 1870. He lived in Sussex as a child; served in the French field artillery; was at Balliol College, Oxford, 1893-95, and sat four years (1906-10) in the House of Commons. Certainly you must read (among his gatherings of essays) On Nothing, On Everything, On Something, Hills and the Sea, First and Last; then you can read The Path to Rome, and The Four Men, and Caliban's Guide to Letters and The Pyrenees and Marie Antoinette. If you desire the bouillon (or bullion) of his charm, there is A Picked Company, a selection (by Mr. E. V. Lucas) of his most representative work. It is published by Methuen and Company, 36 Essex Street W. C., London.
Hilaire Belloc—son of a French father and an English mother; his wonderful blend of both English and French talent in writing is hereditary—was born in France in 1870. He grew up in Sussex as a child, served in the French field artillery, attended Balliol College, Oxford, from 1893 to 1895, and spent four years (1906-1910) in the House of Commons. You definitely need to read (from his collections of essays) On Nothing, On Everything, On Something, Hills and the Sea, First and Last; then you can check out The Path to Rome, The Four Men, Caliban's Guide to Letters, The Pyrenees, and Marie Antoinette. If you want a taste of his charm, there’s A Picked Company, a selection (by Mr. E. V. Lucas) of his most notable work. It is published by Methuen and Company, 36 Essex Street W. C., London.
Having done so, come again: we will go off in a corner and talk about Mr. Belloc.
Having done that, come back: we will go off to a corner and talk about Mr. Belloc.
THERE is a valley in South England remote from ambition and from fear, where the passage of strangers is rare and unperceived, and where the scent of the grass in summer is breathed only by those who are native to that unvisited land. The roads to the Channel do not traverse it; they choose upon either side easier passes over the range. One track alone leads up through it to the hills, and this is changeable: now green where men have little occasion to go, now a good road where it nears the homesteads and the barns. The woods grow steep above the slopes; they reach sometimes the very summit of the heights, or, when they cannot attain them, fill in and clothe the coombes. And, in between, along the floor of the valley, deep pastures and their silence are bordered by lawns of chalky grass and the small yew trees of the Downs.
There’s a valley in South England that’s far from ambition and fear, where it’s rare for strangers to pass through unnoticed, and the summer scent of the grass is felt only by those who live in that untouched land. The roads to the Channel don’t go through it; they prefer easier routes on either side of the range. Only one path leads through it to the hills, and it changes; sometimes it’s green where people rarely go, and other times it’s a good road as it approaches the farms and barns. The woods rise steeply above the slopes; they sometimes reach the very top of the heights, or when they can’t, they fill and cover the valleys. In between, the valley floor is lined with deep pastures and peaceful surroundings, bordered by lawns of chalky grass and small yew trees from the Downs.
The clouds that visit its sky reveal themselves beyond the one great rise, and sail, white and enormous, to the other, and sink beyond that other. But the plains above which they have traveled and the Weald to which they go, the people of the valley cannot see and hardly recall. The wind, when it reaches such fields, is no longer a gale from the salt, but fruitful and soft, an inland breeze; and those whose blood was nourished here feel in that wind the fruitfulness of our orchards and all the life that all things draw from the air.
The clouds that pass through the sky reveal themselves beyond the one big hill, then drift, white and huge, to the other, and disappear beyond that. But the fields they've crossed and the Weald they're heading to, the people of the valley cannot see and barely remember. The wind, when it reaches those lands, is no longer a strong sea breeze, but gentle and nurturing, like an inland breeze; and those whose roots are here feel in that wind the abundance of our orchards and all the life that everything draws from the air.
In this place, when I was a boy, I pushed through a fringe of beeches that made a complete screen between me and the world, and I came to a glade called No Man's Land. I climbed beyond it, and I was surprised and glad, because from the ridge of that glade, I saw the sea. To this place very lately I returned.
In this spot, when I was a kid, I pushed through a line of beeches that completely blocked me off from the world, and I reached a clearing called No Man's Land. I went beyond it, and I was surprised and happy because from the ridge of that clearing, I saw the sea. I just came back to this place recently.
The many things that I recovered as I came up the countryside were not less charming than when a distant memory had enshrined them, but much more. Whatever veil is thrown by a longing recollection had not intensified nor even made more mysterious the beauty of that happy ground; not in my very dreams of morning had I, in exile, seen it more beloved or more rare. Much also that I had forgotten now returned to me as I approached—a group of elms, a little turn of the parson's wall, a small paddock beyond the graveyard close, cherished by one man, with a low wall of very old stone guarding it all round. And all these things fulfilled and amplified my delight, till even the good vision of the place, which I had kept so many years, left me and was replaced by its better reality. "Here," I said to myself, "is a symbol of what some say is reserved for the soul: pleasure of a kind which cannot be imagined save in a moment when at last it is attained."
The many things I rediscovered as I came through the countryside were even more charming than when they were just distant memories. Any haze cast by nostalgic thoughts hadn’t deepened or made more mysterious the beauty of that happy land; not even in my morning dreams during my exile had I seen it as more loved or rare. Much of what I had forgotten now came back to me as I got closer—a group of elms, a little bend in the parson's wall, a small paddock beyond the graveyard, cherished by one person, with a low wall of very old stone surrounding it. And all these things fulfilled and amplified my joy, until even the good image of the place I had held onto for so many years faded away, replaced by its better reality. "Here," I thought to myself, "is a symbol of what some say awaits the soul: a kind of pleasure that can only be fully appreciated when finally experienced."
When I came to my own gate and my own field, and had before me the house I knew, I looked around a little (though it was already evening), and I saw that the grass was standing as it should stand when it is ready for the scythe. For in this, as in everything that a man can do—of those things at least which are very old—there is an exact moment when they are done best. And it has been remarked of whatever rules us that it works blunderingly, seeing that the good things given to a man are not given at the precise moment when they would have filled him with delight. But, whether this be true or false, we can choose the just turn of the seasons in everything we do of our own will, and especially in the making of hay. Many think that hay is best made when the grass is thickest; and so they delay until it is rank and in flower, and has already heavily pulled the ground. And there is another false reason for delay, which is wet weather. For very few will understand (though it comes year after year) that we have rain always in South England between the sickle and the scythe, or say just after the weeks of east wind are over. First we have a week of sudden warmth, as though the south had come to see us all; then we have the weeks of east and south-east wind; and then we have more or less of that rain of which I spoke, and which always astonishes the world. Now it is just before, or during, or at the very end of that rain—but not later—that grass should be cut for hay. True, upland grass, which is always thin, should be cut earlier than the grass in the bottoms and along the water meadows; but not even the latest, even in the wettest seasons, should be left (as it is) to flower and even to seed. For what we get when we store our grass is not a harvest of something ripe, but a thing just caught in its prime before maturity: as witness that our corn and straw are best yellow, but our hay is best green. So also Death should be represented with a scythe and Time with a sickle; for Time can take only what is ripe, but Death comes always too soon. In a word, then, it is always much easier to cut grass too late than too early; and I, under that evening and come back to these pleasant fields, looked at the grass and knew that it was time. June was in full advance; it was the beginning of that season when the night has already lost her foothold of the earth and hovers over it, never quite descending, but mixing sunset with the dawn.
When I arrived at my own gate and my own field, and saw the house I recognized, I looked around a little (even though it was already evening), and I noticed that the grass was standing as it should when it’s ready to be cut. In everything that a person can do—especially the very old tasks—there’s a precise moment when they’re done best. It’s been observed that what governs us tends to be clumsy, as the good things that come to a person often don't arrive at the perfect moment to bring true joy. However, whether that's true or not, we can choose the right timing in everything we do, especially when making hay. Many people think the best hay is made when the grass is thickest, so they wait until it’s tall and flowering, when it has already pulled down the ground. Another common excuse for delay is rainy weather. Very few seem to grasp (even though it happens every year) that in South England, we always get rain somewhere between the sickle and the scythe, or just after the weeks of east winds are over. First, we get a week of sudden warmth, as if the south has come to visit us; then we have weeks of east and southeast winds; and afterward, we see more or less of the rain I mentioned, which always surprises everyone. Grass should be cut for hay just before, during, or at the very end of that rain—but not later. It’s true that upland grass, which is always thin, should be cut earlier than the grass in the low areas and by the water meadows; but even the late cuts, even in the wettest seasons, shouldn’t be left to flower and seed. What we get when we store our grass isn’t a harvest of something ripe, but rather something we’ve caught at its prime before maturity: our corn and straw are best when yellow, but our hay is best when green. Likewise, Death should be depicted with a scythe and Time with a sickle; because Time can only take what’s ripe, but Death always comes too soon. In short, it's always much easier to cut grass too late than too early; and I, on that evening coming back to these lovely fields, looked at the grass and knew it was time. June was fully underway; it was the start of that season when night has already lost its grasp on the earth and hovers above it, never quite settling but blending sunset with dawn.
Next morning, before it was yet broad day, I awoke, and thought of the mowing. The birds were already chattering in the trees beside my window, all except the nightingale, which had left and flown away to the Weald, where he sings all summer by day as well as by night in the oaks and the hazel spinneys, and especially along the little river Adur, one of the rivers of the Weald. The birds and the thought of the mowing had awakened me, and I went down the stairs and along the stone floors to where I could find a scythe; and when I took it from its nail, I remembered how, fourteen years ago, I had last gone out with my scythe, just so, into the fields at morning. In between that day and this were many things, cities and armies, and a confusion of books, mountains and the desert, and horrible great breadths of sea.
Next morning, before it was fully light, I woke up and thought about mowing. The birds were already chirping in the trees next to my window, except for the nightingale, which had left to fly to the Weald, where it sings all summer long, day and night, in the oaks and hazel thickets, especially along the little river Adur, one of the rivers in the Weald. The birds and the thought of mowing had roused me, and I went down the stairs and along the stone floors to find a scythe; when I took it from its hook, I remembered how, fourteen years ago, I had last gone out with my scythe into the fields in the morning. Between that day and now, so much has happened—cities and armies, a jumble of books, mountains and deserts, and vast, terrifying stretches of sea.
When I got out into the long grass the sun was not yet risen, but there were already many colors in the eastern sky, and I made haste to sharpen my scythe, so that I might get to the cutting before the dew should dry. Some say that it is best to wait till all the dew has risen, so as to get the grass quite dry from the very first. But, though it is an advantage to get the grass quite dry, yet it is not worth while to wait till the dew has risen. For, in the first place, you lose many hours of work (and those the coolest), and next—which is more important—you lose that great ease and thickness in cutting which comes of the dew. So I at once began to sharpen my scythe.
When I stepped into the tall grass, the sun hadn’t risen yet, but the eastern sky was already filled with colors, so I quickly sharpened my scythe to start cutting before the dew dried up. Some people say it’s better to wait until all the dew has evaporated to ensure the grass is completely dry from the start. However, while having the grass dry is beneficial, it’s not worth waiting for the dew to disappear. First, you waste hours of work (and those are the cooler hours), and more importantly, you miss out on the nice ease and thickness in cutting that the dew provides. So, I immediately started sharpening my scythe.
There is an art also in the sharpening of the scythe, and it is worth describing carefully. Your blade must be dry, and that is why you will see men rubbing the scythe-blade with grass before they whet it. Then also your rubber must be quite dry, and on this account it is a good thing to lay it on your coat and keep it there during all your day's mowing. The scythe you stand upright, with the blade pointing away from you, and put your left hand firmly on the back of the blade, grasping it: then you pass the rubber first down one side of the blade-edge and then down the other, beginning near the handle and going on to the point and working quickly and hard. When you first do this you will, perhaps, cut your hand; but it is only at first that such an accident will happen to you.
There’s a skill to sharpening the scythe, and it's worth explaining in detail. Your blade needs to be dry, which is why you’ll see people rubbing the scythe’s blade with grass before they sharpen it. Also, your sharpening tool must be completely dry, so it’s a good idea to keep it on your coat while you mow all day. To sharpen, hold the scythe upright with the blade facing away from you, and place your left hand firmly on the back of the blade. Then, use the sharpening tool to rub down one side of the blade edge and then the other, starting near the handle and moving towards the point, working quickly and firmly. You might cut your hand the first time you do this, but such accidents only happen at the beginning.
To tell when the scythe is sharp enough this is the rule. First the stone clangs and grinds against the iron harshly; then it rings musically to one note; then, at last, it purrs as though the iron and stone were exactly suited. When you hear this, your scythe is sharp enough; and I, when I heard it that June dawn, with everything quite silent except the birds, let down the scythe and bent myself to mow.
To know when the scythe is sharp enough, follow this rule. First, the stone hits and grinds against the iron roughly; then it produces a clear musical note; finally, it purrs as if the iron and stone are perfectly matched. When you hear this, your scythe is sharp enough. I, when I heard it that June morning, with everything completely quiet except for the birds, set down the scythe and got ready to mow.
When one does anything anew, after so many years, one fears very much for one's trick or habit. But all things once learnt are easily recoverable, and I very soon recovered the swing and power of the mower. Mowing well and mowing badly—or rather not mowing at all—are separated by very little; as is also true of writing verse, of playing the fiddle, and of dozens of other things, but of nothing more than of believing. For the bad or young or untaught mower without tradition, the mower Promethean, the mower original and contemptuous of the past, does all these things: He leaves great crescents of grass uncut. He digs the point of the scythe hard into the ground with a jerk. He loosens the handles and even the fastening of the blade. He twists the blade with his blunders, he blunts the blade, he chips it, dulls it, or breaks it clean off at the tip. If any one is standing by he cuts him in the ankle. He sweeps up into the air wildly, with nothing to resist his stroke. He drags up earth with the grass, which is like making the meadow bleed. But the good mower who does things just as they should be done and have been for a hundred thousand years, falls into none of these fooleries. He goes forward very steadily, his scythe-blade just barely missing the ground, every grass falling; the swish and rhythm of his mowing are always the same.
When you try something new after so many years, you really worry about your skills or habits. But everything you've learned can be picked up again easily, and I quickly got back into the rhythm and strength of mowing. Mowing well and mowing poorly—or rather not mowing at all—don't differ by much; the same goes for writing poetry, playing the violin, and countless other activities, but nothing compares to the challenge of belief. The inexperienced, young, or untrained mower without any tradition, the innovative and dismissive mower of the past, does all these things: He leaves large patches of grass uncut. He forcefully digs the scythe's point into the ground. He loosens the handles and even the blade's fastening. He twists the blade with his mistakes, dulls it, chips it, or even breaks it clean off at the tip. If someone is nearby, he might accidentally cut their ankle. He swings wildly, with nothing to catch his blow. He lifts dirt along with the grass, almost like making the meadow bleed. But the skilled mower, who does everything as it should be done and has been the same for hundreds of thousands of years, avoids all these foolish mistakes. He moves steadily forward, his scythe blade barely grazing the ground, every blade of grass falling; the sound and rhythm of his mowing remain consistent.
So great an art can only be learnt by continual practice; but this much is worth writing down, that, as in all good work, to know the thing with which you work is the core of the affair. Good verse is best written on good paper with an easy pen, not with a lump of coal on a whitewashed wall. The pen thinks for you; and so does the scythe mow for you if you treat it honorably and in a manner that makes it recognize its service. The manner is this. You must regard the scythe as a pendulum that swings, not as a knife that cuts. A good mower puts no more strength into his stroke than into his lifting. Again, stand up to your work. The bad mower, eager and full of pain, leans forward and tries to force the scythe through the grass. The good mower, serene and able, stands as nearly straight as the shape of the scythe will let him, and follows up every stroke closely, moving his left foot forward. Then also let every stroke get well away. Mowing is a thing of ample gestures, like drawing a cartoon. Then, again, get yourself into a mechanical and repetitive mood: be thinking of anything at all but your mowing, and be anxious only when there seems some interruption to the monotony of the sound. In this mowing should be like one's prayers—all of a sort and always the same, and so made that you can establish a monotony and work them, as it were, with half your mind: that happier half, the half that does not bother.
So great an art can only be learned with constant practice; but it's worth noting that, like with all good work, understanding what you're working with is essential. Good poetry is best written on nice paper with a smooth pen, not with a piece of coal on a white wall. The pen thinks for you; and the scythe will work for you too if you treat it properly and in a way that makes it appreciate its purpose. The approach is this: you should see the scythe as a pendulum that swings, not as a knife that cuts. A good mower uses just enough strength in their stroke as they do in lifting. Also, be present while you work. The bad mower, eager and straining, leans forward and tries to force the scythe through the grass. The good mower, calm and capable, stands as upright as the shape of the scythe allows and follows each stroke closely, moving their left foot forward. Each stroke should be deliberate. Mowing is about big movements, similar to drawing a cartoon. Also, put yourself in a repetitive and mechanical mindset: think about anything except your mowing and only be concerned if there's a break in the steady sound. Mowing should be like prayer—rhythmic and consistent, so that you can establish a routine and do it with half your mind: that happier half, the half that doesn’t get stressed.
In this way, when I had recovered the art after so many years, I went forward over the field, cutting lane after lane through the grass, and bringing out its most secret essences with the sweep of the scythe until the air was full of odors. At the end of every lane I sharpened my scythe and looked back at the work done, and then carried my scythe down again upon my shoulder to begin another. So, long before the bell rang in the chapel above me—that is, long before six o'clock, which is the time for the Angelus—I had many swathes already lying in order parallel like soldiery; and the high grass yet standing, making a great contrast with the shaven part, looked dense and high. As it says in the Ballad of Val-ès-Dunes, where—
In this way, after reclaiming the skill after so many years, I moved through the field, cutting path after path through the grass and revealing its most hidden scents with the scythe's sweep until the air was filled with fragrances. At the end of each path, I sharpened my scythe and glanced back at the work completed, then hoisted my scythe back onto my shoulder to start another. So, long before the bell rang in the chapel above me—that is, well before six o'clock, the time for the Angelus—I had several swaths already lying neatly in rows like soldiers; and the tall grass still standing, creating a stark contrast with the mowed sections, appeared dense and lush. As it says in the Ballad of Val-ès-Dunes, where—
The tall son of the Seven Winds |
Rode out of Hither-hythe, |
and his horse-hoofs (you will remember) trampled into the press and made a gap in it, and his sword (as you know)
and his horse's hooves (you'll remember) trampled into the crowd and made a gap in it, and his sword (as you know)
was like a sword |
In Arcus when the grass is tall |
And all the sections are arranged neatly, |
And there's the bailiff standing by. |
A gathering of the tithe. |
So I mowed all that morning, till the houses awoke in the valley, and from some of them rose a little fragrant smoke, and men began to be seen.
So I mowed all morning until the houses in the valley started waking up, and from some of them, a little fragrant smoke began to rise, and men became visible.
I stood still and rested on my scythe to watch the awakening of the village, when I saw coming up to my field a man whom I had known in older times, before I had left the Valley.
I stood still and leaned on my scythe to watch the village wake up, when I saw a man I had known from the past approaching my field, someone I had known before I left the Valley.
He was of that dark silent race upon which all the learned quarrel, but which, by whatever meaningless name it may be called—Iberian, or Celtic, or what you will—is the permanent root of all England, and makes England wealthy and preserves it everywhere, except perhaps in the Fens and in a part of Yorkshire. Everywhere else you will find it active and strong. These people are intensive; their thoughts and their labors turn inward. It is on account of their presence in these islands that our gardens are the richest in the world. They also love low rooms and ample fires and great warm slopes of thatch. They have, as I believe, an older acquaintance with the English air than any other of all the strains that make up England. They hunted in the Weald with stones, and camped in the pines of the green-sand. They lurked under the oaks of the upper rivers, and saw the legionaries go up, up the straight paved road from the sea. They helped the few pirates to destroy the towns, and mixed with those pirates and shared the spoils of the Roman villas, and were glad to see the captains and the priests destroyed. They remain; and no admixture of the Frisian pirates, or the Breton, or the Angevin and Norman conquerors, has very much affected their cunning eyes.
He belonged to that dark, quiet group that scholars always debate about, but whatever label you want to use—be it Iberian, Celtic, or anything else—this group is the foundational root of all England. They contribute to England's wealth and keep it strong everywhere, except maybe in the Fens and a part of Yorkshire. In every other area, you'll find them vibrant and influential. These people are deeply introspective; their thoughts and efforts focus inward. It's because of their presence in these islands that our gardens are among the richest in the world. They also enjoy low ceilings, cozy fireplaces, and wide, warm thatched roofs. I believe they have a longer relationship with the English climate than any other of the various groups that make up England. They hunted in the Weald with stones and camped in the pine forests of the green-sand. They hid under the oaks by the upper rivers and watched the legionaries march up the straight paved road from the sea. They aided a few pirates in raiding towns, mingled with those pirates, shared the loot from Roman villas, and were pleased to see the captains and priests fall. They endure; no mix of Frisian pirates, Bretons, or the Angevin and Norman conquerors has significantly altered their sharp gaze.
To this race, I say, belonged the man who now approached me. And he said to me, "Mowing?" And I answered, "Ar." Then he also said "Ar," as in duty bound; for so we speak to each other in the Stenes of the Downs.
To this group, I say, belonged the guy who was walking toward me. He asked, "Mowing?" I replied, "Ar." Then he also said "Ar," as was expected; that's how we communicate in the Stenes of the Downs.
Next he told me that, as he had nothing to do, he would lend me a hand; and I thanked him warmly, or, as we say, "kindly." For it is a good custom of ours always to treat bargaining as though it were a courteous pastime; and though what he was after was money, and what I wanted was his labor at the least pay, yet we both played the comedy that we were free men, the one granting a grace and the other accepting it. For the dry bones of commerce, avarice and method and need, are odious to the Valley; and we cover them up with a pretty body of fiction and observances. Thus, when it comes to buying pigs, the buyer does not begin to decry the pig and the vendor to praise it, as is the custom with lesser men; but tradition makes them do business in this fashion:—
Next, he told me that since he had nothing to do, he would give me a hand; and I thanked him warmly, or as we say, "kindly." It's a good custom of ours to treat bargaining as if it were a polite pastime; and even though he was after money and I wanted his labor for the least pay, we both acted as if we were free men—one granting a favor and the other accepting it. The harsh realities of commerce, greed, method, and need, are unappealing in the Valley; and we disguise them with a lovely facade of fiction and tradition. So, when it comes to buying pigs, the buyer doesn't start criticizing the pig while the seller praises it, as lesser folks do; instead, tradition requires them to conduct business this way:—
First the buyer will go up to the seller when he sees him in his own steading, and, looking at the pig with admiration, the buyer will say that rain may or may not fall, or that we shall have snow or thunder, according to the time of the year. Then the seller, looking critically at the pig, will agree that the weather is as his friend maintains. There is no haste at all; great leisure marks the dignity of their exchange. And the next step is, that the buyer says: "That's a fine pig you have there, Mr. ——" (giving the seller's name). "Ar, powerful fine pig." Then the seller, saying also "Mr." (for twin brothers rocked in one cradle give each other ceremonious observance here), the seller, I say, admits, as though with reluctance, the strength and beauty of the pig, and falls into deep thought. Then the buyer says, as though moved by a great desire, that he is ready to give so much for the pig, naming half the proper price, or a little less. Then the seller remains in silence for some moments; and at last begins to shake his head slowly, till he says: "I don't be thinking of selling the pig, anyways." He will also add that a party only Wednesday offered him so much for the pig—and he names about double the proper price. Thus all ritual is duly accomplished; and the solemn act is entered upon with reverence and in a spirit of truth. For when the buyer uses this phrase: "I'll tell you what I will do," and offers within half a crown of the pig's value, the seller replies that he can refuse him nothing, and names half a crown above its value; the difference is split, the pig is sold, and in the quiet soul of each runs the peace of something accomplished.
First, the buyer approaches the seller when he sees him at his place and, admiring the pig, remarks that rain might come or go, or that we could expect snow or thunder, depending on the season. The seller, critically eyeing the pig, agrees that the weather is as his friend says. There’s no rush; their exchange is marked by great leisure and dignity. Then the buyer says, “That’s a fine pig you have there, Mr. ——” (giving the seller's name). “Yeah, it’s a really great pig.” The seller, also addressing him as "Mr." (for twin brothers raised in the same cradle give each other formal respect), reluctantly acknowledges the pig's strength and beauty, falling into deep thought. The buyer then, as if driven by a strong desire, states he’s ready to offer so much for the pig, naming half the proper price or a bit less. The seller remains silent for a moment and then begins to shake his head slowly, before saying, “I’m not really thinking of selling the pig, anyway.” He’ll also mention that someone offered him a substantial amount for the pig on Wednesday—and names about double the proper price. So, all rituals are properly observed, and the serious act begins with respect and honesty. When the buyer says, “I’ll tell you what I will do,” and offers within a few pence of the pig's value, the seller responds that he cannot refuse him anything, naming a few pence above its value; the difference is split, the pig is sold, and in the quiet hearts of each, there feels a sense of peace from something achieved.
Thus do we buy a pig or land or labor or malt or lime, always with elaboration and set forms; and many a London man has paid double and more for his violence and his greedy haste and very unchivalrous higgling. As happened with the land at Underwaltham, which the mortgagees had begged and implored the estate to take at twelve hundred and had privately offered to all the world at a thousand, but which a sharp direct man, of the kind that makes great fortunes, a man in a motor-car, a man in a fur coat, a man of few words, bought for two thousand three hundred before my very eyes, protesting that they might take his offer or leave it; and all because he did not begin by praising the land.
So, we buy a pig, land, labor, malt, or lime, always with detailed agreements and formalities; many Londoners have ended up paying double or more due to their rashness and greedy bargaining, which isn’t very gentlemanly. Take the land at Underwaltham, for instance, where the mortgage holders had begged and pleaded for the estate to accept twelve hundred and had quietly offered it to everyone else for a thousand. But a sharp, straightforward guy, the kind that makes big fortunes—a man in a car, dressed in a fur coat, and who doesn’t say much—bought it for two thousand three hundred right in front of me, insisting they could either accept his offer or reject it; and all because he didn’t start by complimenting the land.
Well then, this man I spoke of offered to help me, and he went to get his scythe. But I went into this house and brought out a gallon jar of small ale for him and for me; for the sun was now very warm, and small ale goes well with mowing. When we had drunk some of this ale in mugs called "I see you," we took each a swathe, he a little behind me because he was the better mower; and so for many hours we swung, one before the other, mowing and mowing at the tall grass of the field. And the sun rose to noon and we were still at our mowing; and we ate food, but only for a little while, and we took again to our mowing. And at last there was nothing left but a small square of grass, standing like a square of linesmen who keep their formation, tall and unbroken, with all the dead lying around them when the battle is over and done.
So, this guy I mentioned offered to help me and went to grab his scythe. I went into the house and brought out a gallon jar of small ale for both of us because the sun was getting pretty hot, and small ale pairs nicely with mowing. After we enjoyed some of this ale from mugs called "I see you," we each took a section to mow—he was slightly behind me since he was the better mower. For hours, we kept swinging our scythes, one after the other, cutting through the tall grass in the field. The sun climbed to noon, and we were still mowing; we stopped to eat for just a short while before getting back to it. Eventually, all that was left was a small patch of grass, standing tall and unbroken like the linesmen who keep their formation, surrounded by the dead after the battle is over.
Then for some little time I rested after all those hours; and the man and I talked together, and a long way off we heard in another field the musical sharpening of a scythe.
Then, for a little while, I rested after all those hours; and the man and I chatted, and from far away, we heard the sweet sound of a scythe being sharpened in another field.
The sunlight slanted powdered and mellow over the breadth of the valley; for day was nearing its end. I went to fetch rakes from the steading; and when I had come back the last of the grass had fallen, and all the field lay flat and smooth, with the very green short grass in lanes between the dead and yellow swathes.
The sunlight slanted softly and warmly over the wide valley as the day was coming to a close. I went to grab rakes from the barn, and by the time I returned, the last of the grass had been cut, leaving the entire field flat and smooth, with the bright green short grass forming strips between the dead and yellow patches.
These swathes we raked into cocks to keep them from the dew against our return at daybreak; and we made the cocks as tall and steep as we could, for in that shape they best keep off the dew, and it is easier also to spread them after the sun has risen. Then we raked up every straggling blade, till the whole field was a clean floor for the tedding and the carrying of the hay next morning. The grass we had mown was but a little over two acres; for that is all the pasture on my little tiny farm.
These piles we raked into mounds to protect them from the dew when we returned at dawn; we made the mounds as tall and steep as possible since that shape keeps off the dew best, and it’s also easier to spread them after the sun comes up. Then we raked up every stray blade, until the entire field was a clean floor for spreading and collecting the hay the next morning. The grass we had cut was just a little over two acres; that’s all the pasture on my small little farm.
When we had done all this, there fell upon us the beneficent and deliberate evening; so that as we sat a little while together near the rakes, we saw the valley more solemn and dim around us, and all the trees and hedgerows quite still, and held by a complete silence. Then I paid my companion his wage, and bade him a good night, till we should meet in the same place before sunrise.
When we finished all of this, a kind and intentional evening settled around us. As we sat together for a bit near the rakes, the valley looked more serious and dim, and all the trees and hedgerows were completely still, enveloped in silence. I then paid my friend for his work and wished him a good night, promising to meet again in the same spot before sunrise.
He went off with a slow and steady progress, as all our peasants do, making their walking a part of the easy but continual labor of their lives. But I sat on, watching the light creep around towards the north and change, and the waning moon coming up as though by stealth behind the woods of No Man's Land.
THE STUDENT LIFE
By WILLIAM OSLER
Sir William Osler, one of the best-loved and most influential teachers of his time, was born in Canada in 1849. He began his education in Toronto and at McGill University, Montreal, where he served as professor of medicine, 1874-84. Wherever he worked his gifted and unique personality was a center of inspiration—at the University of Pennsylvania, 1884-89; at Johns Hopkins, 1889-1904. In 1904 he went to Oxford as Regius Professor of Medicine; he died in England in 1919.
Sir William Osler, one of the most beloved and influential teachers of his time, was born in Canada in 1849. He started his education in Toronto and at McGill University in Montreal, where he was a professor of medicine from 1874 to 1884. Wherever he worked, his talented and unique personality was a source of inspiration—at the University of Pennsylvania from 1884 to 1889, and at Johns Hopkins from 1889 to 1904. In 1904, he moved to Oxford as Regius Professor of Medicine; he passed away in England in 1919.
Only our medical friends have a right to speak of the great doctor's place in their own world; but one would like to see his honorable place as a man of letters more generally understood. His generous wisdom and infectious enthusiasm are delightfully expressed in his collected writings. No lover of the essay can afford to overlook Æquanimitas and Other Addresses, An Alabama Student and Other Biographical Essays, Science and Immortality and Counsels and Ideals, this last an anthology collected from his professional papers by one of his pupils. He stands in the honorable line of those great masters who have found their highest usefulness as kindly counselors of the young. His lucid and exquisite prose, with its extraordinary wealth of quotation from the literature of all ages, and his unfailing humor and tenderness, put him in the first rank of didactic essayists. One could get a liberal education in literature merely by following up all his quotations and references. He was more deeply versed in the classics than many professors of Greek and Latin; the whole music of English poetry seemed to be current in his blood. His essay on Keats, taken with Kipling's wonderful story Via Wireless, tells the student more about that poet than many a volume of biography. When was biography more delightfully written than in his volume An Alabama Student?
Only our medical colleagues really have the right to discuss the great doctor's status in their field; however, it would be nice to see his respected position as a writer more widely acknowledged. His generous wisdom and infectious enthusiasm are wonderfully captured in his collected writings. No fan of essays can afford to miss Æquanimitas and Other Addresses, An Alabama Student and Other Biographical Essays, Science and Immortality, and Counsels and Ideals, the latter being an anthology gathered from his professional papers by one of his students. He belongs to the esteemed line of great masters who have been most useful as compassionate guides for the young. His clear and beautiful prose, rich with quotations from literature throughout the ages, along with his consistent humor and tenderness, places him among the top didactic essayists. You could receive a well-rounded education in literature just by exploring all his quotes and references. He was more knowledgeable about the classics than many Greek and Latin professors; the entire essence of English poetry seemed to flow through him. His essay on Keats, paired with Kipling's remarkable story Via Wireless, teaches students more about that poet than many biographies do. When has biography ever been written more delightfully than in his book An Alabama Student?
Walt Whitman said, when Dr. Osler attended him years ago, "Osler believes in the gospel of encouragement—of putting the best construction on things—the best foot forward. He's a fine fellow and a wise one, I guess." The great doctor's gospel of encouragement is indeed a happy companion for the midnight reader. Rich in every gentle quality that makes life endeared, his books are the most sagacious and helpful of modern writings for the young student. As one who has found them an unfailing delight, I venture to hope that our medical confrères may not be the only readers to enjoy their vivacity and charm.
Walt Whitman said, when Dr. Osler helped him years ago, "Osler believes in the power of encouragement—looking on the bright side of things—putting the best foot forward. He's a great person and a wise one, I reckon." The great doctor's message of encouragement is truly a wonderful companion for night readers. Filled with every gentle quality that makes life special, his books are some of the most insightful and helpful modern writings for young students. As someone who has found them to be a constant joy, I hope that our fellow medical professionals won't be the only ones to appreciate their energy and charm.
EXCEPT it be a lover, no one is more interesting as an object of study than a student. Shakespeare might have made him a fourth in his immortal group. The lunatic with his fixed idea, the poet with his fine frenzy, the lover with his frantic idolatry, and the student aflame with the desire for knowledge are of "imagination all compact." To an absorbing passion, a whole-souled devotion, must be joined an enduring energy, if the student is to become a devotee of the gray-eyed goddess to whose law his services are bound. Like the quest of the Holy Grail, the quest of Minerva is not for all. For the one, the pure life; for the other, what Milton calls "a strong propensity of nature." Here again the student often resembles the poet—he is born, not made. While the resultant of two molding forces, the accidental, external conditions, and the hidden germinal energies, which produce in each one of us national, family, and individual traits, the true student possesses in some measure a divine spark which sets at naught their laws. Like the Snark, he defies definition, but there are three unmistakable signs by which you may recognize the genuine article from a Boojum—an absorbing desire to know the truth, an unswerving steadfastness in its pursuit, and an open, honest heart, free from suspicion, guile, and jealousy.
EXCEPT for a lover, no one is more fascinating as an object of study than a student. Shakespeare could have included him as a fourth in his timeless group. The lunatic with his fixed idea, the poet with his intense passion, the lover with his wild adoration, and the student burning with the desire for knowledge are all "imagination all compact." To a consuming passion and a wholehearted devotion, there must also be lasting energy if the student is to become a devotee of the gray-eyed goddess to whose law he is committed. Like the pursuit of the Holy Grail, the pursuit of Minerva is not for everyone. For one, it demands a pure life; for the other, what Milton refers to as "a strong propensity of nature." Once again, the student often mirrors the poet—he is born, not made. While shaped by two influencing forces, the external conditions and the hidden, intrinsic energies that create our national, family, and individual traits, the true student has in some way a divine spark that disregards those laws. Like the Snark, he cannot be defined, but there are three clear signs by which you can distinguish the real thing from a Boojum—an intense desire to uncover the truth, a steadfast commitment to that pursuit, and an open, honest heart, free from suspicion, deceit, and envy.
At the outset do not be worried about this big question—Truth. It is a very simple matter if each one of you starts with the desire to get as much as possible. No human being is constituted to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and even the best of men must be content with fragments, with partial glimpses, never the full fruition. In this unsatisfied quest the attitude of mind, the desire, the thirst—a thirst that from the soul must rise!—the fervent longing, are the be-all and the end-all. What is the student but a lover courting a fickle mistress who ever eludes his grasp? In this very elusiveness is brought out his second great characteristic—steadfastness of purpose. Unless from the start the limitations incident to our frail human faculties are frankly accepted, nothing but disappointment awaits you. The truth is the best you can get with your best endeavor, the best that the best men accept—with this you must learn to be satisfied, retaining at the same time with due humility an earnest desire for an ever larger portion. Only by keeping the mind plastic and receptive does the student escape perdition. It is not, as Charles Lamb remarks, that some people do not know what to do with truth when it is offered to them, but the tragic fate is to reach, after years of patient search, a condition of mind-blindness in which the truth is not recognized, though it stares you in the face. This can never happen to a man who has followed step by step the growth of a truth, and who knows the painful phases of its evolution. It is one of the great tragedies of life that every truth has to struggle to acceptance against honest but mind-blind students. Harvey knew his contemporaries well, and for twelve successive years demonstrated the circulation of the blood before daring to publish the facts on which the truth was based.[D]
At the beginning, don’t stress over this big question—Truth. It’s pretty straightforward if each of you starts with a desire to gain as much as possible. No one is meant to know the complete truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; even the best among us have to be satisfied with bits and pieces, only partial glimpses, never the entire picture. In this unfulfilled search, the mindset, the desire, the yearning—an urge that must rise from the soul!—the intense longing, are everything. What is a student but someone in love with a capricious partner who always slips away? In that very elusiveness lies his second big trait—determination. Unless we openly accept the limits of our fragile human abilities from the start, disappointment is all you will find. The truth is the best you can achieve with your best effort, the best that even the greatest individuals accept—with this, you must learn to be content, while also maintaining a humble but intense desire for even more. Only by keeping your mind flexible and open does the student avoid downfall. It’s not that some people don’t know what to do with truth when it comes to them, as Charles Lamb notes, but the real tragedy is reaching a state of mind-blindness after years of patient searching, where you fail to recognize the truth even when it’s right in front of you. This can never happen to someone who has closely followed the development of a truth and understands the tough stages it goes through. One of life's great tragedies is that every truth has to fight for acceptance against well-meaning but narrow-minded students. Harvey understood his peers well, and for twelve years he demonstrated the circulation of blood before finally daring to publish the findings on which the truth was founded.[D]
Only steadfastness of purpose and humility enable the student to shift his position to meet the new conditions in which new truths are born, or old ones modified beyond recognition. And, thirdly, the honest heart will keep him in touch with his fellow students, and furnish that sense of comradeship without which he travels an arid waste alone. I say advisedly an honest heart—the honest head is prone to be cold and stern, given to judgment, not mercy, and not always able to entertain that true charity which, while it thinketh no evil, is anxious to put the best possible interpretation upon the motives of a fellow worker. It will foster, too, an attitude of generous, friendly rivalry untinged by the green peril, jealousy, that is the best preventive of the growth of a bastard scientific spirit, loving seclusion and working in a lock-and-key laboratory, as timorous of light as is a thief.
Only determination and humility allow a student to adapt to new situations where new truths emerge or old ones change completely. Additionally, a sincere heart will keep them connected with their fellow students, providing a sense of camaraderie that is essential to avoid feeling isolated. I emphasize a sincere heart—an honest mind can be cold and harsh, focused on judgment rather than compassion, and not always capable of extending the true kindness that seeks to understand the best intentions of a colleague. It will also encourage a spirit of generous, friendly competition, free from the toxic jealousy that hinders the development of a healthy scientific atmosphere, one that shuns isolation and instead embraces openness.
You have all become brothers in a great society, not apprentices, since that implies a master, and nothing should be further from the attitude of the teacher than much that is meant in that word, used though it be in another sense, particularly by our French brethren in a most delightful way, signifying a bond of intellectual filiation. A fraternal attitude is not easy to cultivate—the chasm between the chair and the bench is difficult to bridge. Two things have helped to put up a cantilever across the gulf. The successful teacher is no longer on a height, pumping knowledge at high pressure into passive receptacles. The new methods have changed all this. He is no longer Sir Oracle, perhaps unconsciously by his very manner antagonizing minds to whose level he cannot possibly descend, but he is a senior student anxious to help his juniors. When a simple, earnest spirit animates a college, there is no appreciable interval between the teacher and the taught—both are in the same class, the one a little more advanced than the other. So animated, the student feels that he has joined a family whose honor is his honor, whose welfare is his own, and whose interests should be his first consideration.
You all have become brothers in a great community, not apprentices, since that suggests a master, and nothing should be further from the teacher's attitude than much of what that word implies, even though it’s used in a different sense, especially by our French counterparts in a really enjoyable way, meaning a bond of intellectual connection. A brotherly attitude isn’t easy to develop—the gap between the lecturer and the student is tough to close. Two things have helped create a bridge across this divide. The effective teacher is no longer on a pedestal, force-feeding knowledge into passive recipients. The new methods have changed that. He’s not the all-knowing authority, perhaps unknowingly alienating minds he cannot possibly reach, but rather a senior student eager to assist his juniors. When a simple, sincere spirit energizes a college, there’s virtually no noticeable gap between the teacher and the students—they’re in the same group, with one being just a bit more advanced than the other. In this environment, the student feels like he’s joined a family whose honor is his honor, whose well-being is his own, and whose interests should be his top priority.
The hardest conviction to get into the mind of a beginner is that the education upon which he is engaged is not a college course, not a medical course, but a life course, for which the work of a few years under teachers is but a preparation. Whether you will falter and fail in the race or whether you will be faithful to the end depends on the training before the start, and on your staying powers, points upon which I need not enlarge. You can all become good students, a few may become great students, and now and again one of you will be found who does easily and well what others cannot do at all, or very badly, which is John Ferriar's excellent definition of a genius.
The toughest idea for a beginner to grasp is that the education they are pursuing isn’t just a college program or a medical course, but rather a lifelong journey, where a few years of learning under instructors is just a stepping stone. Whether you stumble and give up in the race or stay committed until the end relies on the preparation you have before you start and your ability to persevere, areas I don’t need to elaborate on. All of you can become good students, a few might become great students, and occasionally, one of you will be able to do what others struggle with, which aligns perfectly with John Ferriar's excellent definition of a genius.
In the hurry and bustle of a business world, which is the life of this continent, it is not easy to train first-class students. Under present conditions it is hard to get the needful seclusion, on which account it is that our educational market is so full of wayside fruit. I have always been much impressed by the advice of St. Chrysostom: "Depart from the highway and transplant thyself in some enclosed ground, for it is hard for a tree which stands by the wayside to keep her fruit till it be ripe." The dilettante is abroad in the land, the man who is always venturing on tasks for which he is imperfectly equipped, a habit of mind fostered by the multiplicity of subjects in the curriculum: and while many things are studied, few are studied thoroughly. Men will not take time to get to the heart of a matter. After all, concentration is the price the modern student pays for success. Thoroughness is the most difficult habit to acquire, but it is the pearl of great price, worth all the worry and trouble of the search. The dilettante lives an easy, butterfly life, knowing nothing of the toil and labor with which the treasures of knowledge are dug out of the past, or wrung by patient research in the laboratories. Take, for example, the early history of this country—how easy for the student of the one type to get a smattering, even a fairly full acquaintance with the events of the French and Spanish settlements. Put an original document before him, and it might as well be Arabic. What we need is the other type, the man who knows the records, who, with a broad outlook and drilled in what may be called the embryology of history, has yet a powerful vision for the minutiæ of life. It is these kitchen and backstair men who are to be encouraged, the men who know the subject in hand in all possible relationships. Concentration has its drawbacks. It is possible to become so absorbed in the problem of the "enclitic δε," or the structure of the flagella of the Trichomonas, or of the toes of the prehistoric horse, that the student loses the sense of proportion in his work, and even wastes a lifetime in researches which are valueless because not in touch with current knowledge. You remember poor Casaubon, in "Middlemarch," whose painful scholarship was lost on this account. The best preventive to this is to get denationalized early. The true student is a citizen of the world, the allegiance of whose soul, at any rate, is too precious to be restricted to a single country. The great minds, the great works transcend all limitations of time, of language, and of race, and the scholar can never feel initiated into the company of the elect until he can approach all of life's problems from the cosmopolitan standpoint. I care not in what subject he may work, the full knowledge cannot be reached without drawing on supplies from lands other than his own—French, English, German, American, Japanese, Russian, Italian—there must be no discrimination by the loyal student who should willingly draw from any and every source with an open mind and a stern resolve to render unto all their dues. I care not on what stream of knowledge he may embark, follow up its course, and the rivulets that feed it flow from many lands. If the work is to be effective he must keep in touch with scholars in other countries. How often has it happened that years of precious time have been given to a problem already solved or shown to be insoluble, because of the ignorance of what had been done elsewhere. And it is not only book knowledge and journal knowledge, but a knowledge of men that is needed. The student will, if possible, see the men in other lands. Travel not only widens the vision and gives certainties in place of vague surmises, but the personal contact with foreign workers enables him to appreciate better the failings or successes in his own line of work, perhaps to look with more charitable eyes on the work of some brother whose limitations and opportunities have been more restricted than his own. Or, in contact with a mastermind, he may take fire, and the glow of the enthusiasm may be the inspiration of his life. Concentration must then be associated with large views on the relation of the problem, and a knowledge of its status elsewhere; otherwise it may land him in the slough of a specialism so narrow that it has depth and no breadth, or he may be led to make what he believes to be important discoveries, but which have long been current coin in other lands. It is sad to think that the day of the great polymathic student is at an end; that we may, perhaps, never again see a Scaliger, a Haller, or a Humboldt—men who took the whole field of knowledge for their domain and viewed it as from a pinnacle. And yet a great specializing generalist may arise, who can tell? Some twentieth-century Aristotle may be now tugging at his bottle, as little dreaming as are his parents or his friends of a conquest of the mind, beside which the wonderful victories of the Stagirite will look pale. The value of a really great student to the country is equal to half a dozen grain elevators or a new trans-continental railway. He is a commodity singularly fickle and variable, and not to be grown to order. So far as his advent is concerned there is no telling when or where he may arise. The conditions seem to be present even under the most unlikely externals. Some of the greatest students this country has produced have come from small villages and country places. It is impossible to predict from a study of the environment, which a "strong propensity of nature," to quote Milton's phrase again, will easily bend or break.
In the hustle and bustle of today’s business world, which defines life on this continent, it's challenging to cultivate top-notch students. Given the current conditions, it's tough to find the necessary seclusion, which is why our educational market is so filled with superficial knowledge. I’ve always been struck by St. Chrysostom’s advice: "Leave the main road and plant yourself in an enclosed space, because it’s hard for a tree by the roadside to keep its fruit until it’s ripe." The amateur is everywhere, the person who constantly takes on tasks for which they're only partially prepared, a mindset supported by the wide variety of subjects in the curriculum: while many things are covered, few are learned deeply. People don’t take the time to really understand a subject. Ultimately, concentration is what the modern student sacrifices for success. Thoroughness is the hardest habit to develop, but it is the priceless gem that makes all the stress and effort worthwhile. The amateur leads an easy, carefree life, unaware of the hard work and painstaking research required to unearth the treasures of knowledge from the past. Take, for instance, the early history of this country—it's easy for a certain type of student to gain a superficial understanding, even a decent familiarity with French and Spanish settlements. But place an original document in front of them, and it might as well be in Arabic. What we need is the other type—the person who knows the records, who, with a broad perspective and trained in what might be called the embryology of history, also has a keen insight into life’s details. It is these diligent individuals who should be encouraged, the ones who understand their subjects in all possible contexts. Concentration has its downsides too. One can become so engrossed in the intricacies of an "enclitic δε," or the structure of Trichomonas flagella, or even the toes of prehistoric horses, that the student loses sight of the overall significance of their work and may end up wasting a lifetime on research that lacks value since it’s disconnected from current knowledge. You remember poor Casaubon from "Middlemarch," whose painstaking scholarship amounted to little because of this. The best prevention for this is to become cosmopolitan early on. The true student is a citizen of the world, whose allegiance should be too precious to limit to just one country. Great minds and significant works transcend the boundaries of time, language, and race, and a scholar will never truly feel among the elite until they can approach all of life's challenges from a global perspective. It doesn’t matter what subject they work in; complete knowledge can't be achieved without tapping into resources from various countries—French, English, German, American, Japanese, Russian, Italian—there should be no bias from the dedicated student, who must willingly learn from every available source with an open mind and a determined effort to give credit where it’s due. No matter what branch of knowledge they pursue, if they follow its journey, they’ll discover that the streams feeding it come from many regions. To be effective, they must remain connected with scholars from other countries. How often have years of valuable time been wasted on a problem that has already been addressed or proven unsolvable because of ignorance about what has been accomplished elsewhere? And it’s not just knowledge from books and journals that’s required, but an understanding of people as well. The student should try to meet those working in other nations. Traveling not only broadens perspectives and turns vague suspicions into definite knowledge, but personal interactions with foreign colleagues help them better recognize the limitations or achievements in their own work, perhaps allowing them to view the efforts of their peers, who may have faced more constraints, with greater empathy. Or, encountering a brilliant mind, they might ignite their passion, and that enthusiasm could inspire them throughout their lives. Concentration should be paired with a broader understanding of the problem’s context and awareness of its status globally; otherwise, it may trap them in a specialization so narrow that it lacks depth and breadth, or lead them to believe they've made significant discoveries that are already well-known elsewhere. It’s unfortunate to think the era of the great polymath is over; that we may never see another Scaliger, Haller, or Humboldt—individuals who viewed the entire field of knowledge as their domain from a lofty perspective. Yet, perhaps a remarkable generalist will emerge; who knows? A 21st-century Aristotle might now be working away, as unaware as his parents or friends of an intellectual breakthrough that could overshadow the amazing achievements of the Stagirite. The value of an exceptional student to the country is equal to that of multiple grain elevators or a new transcontinental railway. Such a person is incredibly unpredictable and variable, and they can't be easily cultivated for a specific purpose. As for when or where they will emerge, it’s anyone's guess. Conditions seem to exist even in the most unexpected situations. Some of the greatest scholars this country has produced have come from small towns and rural areas. It’s impossible to determine from environmental studies which "strong tendencies of nature," to quote Milton again, will easily bend or break.
The student must be allowed full freedom in his work, undisturbed by the utilitarian spirit of the Philistine, who cries, Cui bono? and distrusts pure science. The present remarkable position in applied science and in industrial trades of all sorts has been made possible by men who did pioneer work in chemistry, in physics, in biology, and in physiology, without a thought in their researches of any practical application. The members of this higher group of productive students are rarely understood by the common spirits, who appreciate as little their unselfish devotion as their unworldly neglect of the practical side of the problems.
The student should be given complete freedom in their work, free from the practical mindset of those who question, "What's the benefit?" and are skeptical of pure science. The incredible advancements in applied science and various industrial fields today have been made possible by individuals who did groundbreaking work in chemistry, physics, biology, and physiology without considering any practical applications in their research. The members of this higher group of dedicated students are often misunderstood by the average person, who values little their selfless commitment as well as their disregard for the practical aspects of the issues at hand.
Everywhere now the medical student is welcomed as an honored member of the guild. There was a time, I confess, and it is within the memory of some of us, when, like Falstaff, he was given to "taverns and sack and wine and metheglins, and to drinkings and swearings and starings, pribbles and prabbles"; but all that has changed with the curriculum, and the "Meds" now roar you as gently as the "Theologs." On account of the peculiar character of the subject-matter of your studies, what I have said upon the general life and mental attitude of the student applies with tenfold force to you. Man, with all his mental and bodily anomalies and diseases—the machine in order, the machine in disorder, and the business yours to put it to rights. Through all the phases of its career this most complicated mechanism of this wonderful world will be the subject of our study and of your care—the naked, new-born infant, the artless child, the lad and the lassie just aware of the tree of knowledge overhead, the strong man in the pride of life, the woman with the benediction of maternity on her brow, and the aged, peaceful in the contemplation of the past. Almost everything has been renewed in the science and in the art of medicine, but all through the long centuries there has been no variableness or shadow of change in the essential features of the life which is our contemplation and our care. The sick love-child of Israel's sweet singer, the plague-stricken hopes of the great Athenian statesman, Elpenor, bereft of his beloved Artemidora, and "Tully's daughter mourned so tenderly," are not of any age or any race—they are here with us to-day, with the Hamlets, the Ophelias, and the Lears. Amid an eternal heritage of sorrow and suffering our work is laid, and this eternal note of sadness would be insupportable if the daily tragedies were not relieved by the spectacle of the heroism and devotion displayed by the actors. Nothing will sustain you more potently than the power to recognize in your humdrum routine, as perhaps it may be thought, the true poetry of life—the poetry of the commonplace, of the ordinary man, of the plain, toilworn woman, with their loves and their joys, their sorrows and their griefs. The comedy, too, of life will be spread before you, and nobody laughs more often than the doctor at the pranks Puck plays upon the Titanias and the Bottoms among his patients. The humorous side is really almost as frequently turned towards him as the tragic. Lift up one hand to heaven and thank your stars if they have given you the proper sense to enable you to appreciate the inconceivably droll situations in which we catch our fellow creatures. Unhappily, this is one of the free gifts of the gods, unevenly distributed, not bestowed on all, or on all in equal portions. In undue measure it is not without risk, and in any case in the doctor it is better appreciated by the eye than expressed on the tongue. Hilarity and good humor, a breezy cheerfulness, a nature "sloping toward the southern side," as Lowell has it, help enormously both in the study and in the practice of medicine. To many of a somber and sour disposition it is hard to maintain good spirits amid the trials and tribulations of the day, and yet it is an unpardonable mistake to go about among patients with a long face.
Everywhere, the medical student is now celebrated as a valued member of the community. There was a time, I admit, and some of us remember it, when, like Falstaff, he was known for "taverns and sack and wine and metheglins, and for drinking, swearing, staring, pribbles and prabbles"; but that has all changed with the curriculum, and today's "Meds" treat you as gently as the "Theologs." Given the unique nature of your studies, what I’ve said about the general life and mindset of students applies with even greater intensity to you. Humanity, with all its mental and physical ailments— the machine in order, the machine in disarray, and it’s your job to set it right. Throughout all stages of life, this intricate mechanism of our amazing world will be the focus of our study and your care—the naked, newborn infant, the innocent child, the young adult just discovering the tree of knowledge overhead, the strong individual in the prime of life, the woman blessed by motherhood, and the elderly, finding peace in reflecting on the past. Nearly everything in the science and art of medicine has evolved, but through the long ages, the fundamental aspects of life we observe and care for remain unchanged. The sick love-child of Israel's sweet singer, the plague-laden hopes of Greece’s great statesman, Elpenor, who mourned his beloved Artemidora, and "Tully's daughter mourned so tenderly," transcend any time or culture—they are with us today, alongside the Hamlets, the Ophelias, and the Lears. Amid an endless legacy of sorrow and suffering, our work is to be done, and this ongoing tone of sadness would be unbearable if not softened by the heroism and commitment shown by those involved. Nothing will support you more than the ability to see the true poetry in your everyday routines, as unremarkable as they may seem—the poetry of the ordinary, of the everyday person, of the plain, overworked woman, with their loves and joys, their sorrows and griefs. The humor of life will also unfold before you, and few laugh as often as the doctor at the antics Puck plays on the Titanias and Bottoms among his patients. The humorous side is almost as frequently directed at him as the tragic elements. Raise one hand to the heavens and thank your stars if they’ve given you the wisdom to find humor in the incredibly absurd situations we encounter with others. Unfortunately, this is a rare gift given unevenly by the gods, not shared by everyone, or not shared equally. In excess, it poses risks, and in any case, in the doctor, it’s often better perceived through observation than articulated with words. Cheerfulness, lightheartedness, and a happy disposition, like "sloping toward the southern side," as Lowell puts it, significantly aid both in studying and practicing medicine. For those with a gloomy and sour outlook, it can be challenging to maintain good spirits amid daily hardships, and yet it is a serious mistake to walk among patients with a long face.
Divide your attentions equally between books and men. The strength of the student of books is to sit still—two or three hours at a stretch—eating the heart out of a subject with pencil and notebook in hand, determined to master the details and intricacies, focussing all your energies on its difficulties. Get accustomed to test all sorts of book problems and statements for yourself, and take as little as possible on trust. The Hunterian "Do not think, but try" attitude of mind is the important one to cultivate. The question came up one day, when discussing the grooves left on the nails after fever, how long it took for the nail to grow out, from root to edge. A majority of the class had no further interest; a few looked it up in books; two men marked their nails at the root with nitrate of silver, and a few months later had positive knowledge on the subject. They showed the proper spirit. The little points that come up in your reading try to test for yourselves. With one fundamental difficulty many of you will have to contend from the outset—a lack of proper preparation for really hard study. No one can have watched successive groups of young men pass through the special schools without profoundly regretting the haphazard, fragmentary character of their preliminary education. It does seem too bad that we cannot have a student in his eighteenth year sufficiently grounded in the humanities and in the sciences preliminary to medicine—but this is an educational problem upon which only a Milton or a Locke could discourse with profit. With pertinacity you can overcome the preliminary defects and once thoroughly interested, the work in books becomes a pastime. A serious drawback in the student life is the self-consciousness, bred of too close devotion to books. A man gets shy, "dysopic," as old Timothy Bright calls it, and shuns the looks of men, and blushes like a girl.
Balance your focus equally between reading and interacting with people. The strength of a book learner comes from the ability to sit still for two or three hours at a time, diving deep into a subject with a pencil and notebook in hand, committed to mastering its details and complexities, pouring all your energy into overcoming challenges. Get in the habit of questioning all kinds of book problems and statements yourself, taking as little as possible on faith. The Hunterian "Don't just think, but try" mindset is crucial to develop. One day, while discussing the grooves left on nails after a fever, we pondered how long it takes for a nail to grow out from root to tip. Most of the class lost interest; a few looked it up in books; two guys marked their nails at the root with silver nitrate, and a few months later had definite knowledge on the topic. They displayed the right spirit. When you come across small details in your reading, test them for yourselves. One major challenge that many of you will face from the start is a lack of proper preparation for really intense study. Anyone who has observed successive groups of young men going through specialized schools can't help but feel disappointed by the random, fragmented nature of their early education. It really is unfortunate that we can't have an eighteen-year-old student who is well-grounded in both the humanities and the sciences before studying medicine—but that’s an educational issue that only someone like Milton or Locke could discuss profitably. With determination, you can overcome these initial shortcomings, and once you are genuinely interested, studying becomes enjoyable. A significant downside of student life is the self-consciousness that comes from being overly focused on books. A person becomes shy, "dysopic," as old Timothy Bright put it, avoiding eye contact and blushing like a girl.
The strength of a student of men is to travel—to study men, their habits, character, mode of life, their behavior under varied conditions, their vices, virtues, and peculiarities. Begin with a careful observation of your fellow students and of your teachers; then, every patient you see is a lesson in much more than the malady from which he suffers. Mix as much as you possibly can with the outside world, and learn its ways. Cultivated systematically, the student societies, the students' union, the gymnasium, and the outside social circle will enable you to conquer the diffidence so apt to go with bookishness and which may prove a very serious drawback in after-life. I cannot too strongly impress upon the earnest and attentive men among you the necessity of overcoming this unfortunate failing in your student days. It is not easy for every one to reach a happy medium, and the distinction between a proper self-confidence and "cheek," particularly in junior students, is not always to be made. The latter is met with chiefly among the student pilgrims who, in traveling down the Delectable Mountains, have gone astray and have passed to the left hand, where lieth the country of Conceit, the country in which you remember the brisk lad Ignorance met Christian.
The strength of a student of people is to explore—to study individuals, their habits, character, way of life, behavior in different situations, their flaws, strengths, and quirks. Start by observing your fellow students and teachers closely; then, every patient you encounter teaches you much more than just about their illness. Engage as much as you can with the outside world, and learn its ways. When cultivated systematically, student organizations, the student union, the gym, and social circles will help you overcome the shyness that often accompanies book smarts, which can be a serious disadvantage later in life. I can't stress enough to the dedicated and focused individuals among you how important it is to tackle this unfortunate problem during your student years. It’s not easy for everyone to strike the right balance, and distinguishing between healthy self-confidence and arrogance, especially among younger students, isn’t always clear. Arrogance is mainly found among student wanderers who, while journeying through the Delectable Mountains, have lost their way and veered off to the left, into the land of Conceit, where you may recall that the eager boy Ignorance encountered Christian.
I wish we could encourage on this continent among our best students the habit of wandering. I do not know that we are quite prepared for it, as there is still great diversity in the curricula, even among the leading schools, but it is undoubtedly a great advantage to study under different teachers, as the mental horizon is widened and the sympathies enlarged. The practice would do much to lessen that narrow "I am of Paul and I am of Apollos" spirit which is hostile to the best interests of the profession.
I wish we could promote the habit of exploring among our top students on this continent. I’m not sure we’re fully ready for it yet, since there’s still a lot of variation in the coursework across even the best schools. However, studying under different teachers is definitely a big advantage, as it broadens one’s perspective and increases understanding. This practice would help reduce that narrow-minded “I follow Paul, and I follow Apollos” attitude that is detrimental to the profession's best interests.
There is much that I would like to say on the question of work, but I can spare only a few moments for a word or two. Who will venture to settle upon so simple a matter as the best time for work? One will tell us there is no best time; all are equally good; and truly, all times are the same to a man whose soul is absorbed in some great problem. The other day I asked Edward Martin, the well-known story-writer, what time he found best for work. "Not in the evening, and never between meals!" was his answer, which may appeal to some of my hearers. One works best at night; another, in the morning; a majority of the students of the past favor the latter. Erasmus, the great exemplar, says, "Never work at night; it dulls the brain and hurts the health." One day, going with George Ross through Bedlam, Dr. Savage, at that time the physician in charge, remarked upon two great groups of patients—those who were depressed in the morning and those who were cheerful, and he suggested that the spirits rose and fell with the bodily temperature—those with very low morning temperatures were depressed, and vice versa. This, I believe, expresses a truth which may explain the extraordinary difference in the habits of students in this matter of the time at which the best work can be done. Outside of the asylum there are also the two great types, the student-lark who loves to see the sun rise, who comes to breakfast with a cheerful morning face, never so "fit" as at 6 A. M. We all know the type. What a contrast to the student-owl with his saturnine morning face, thoroughly unhappy, cheated by the wretched breakfast bell of the two best hours of the day for sleep, no appetite, and permeated with an unspeakable hostility to his vis-à-vis, whose morning garrulity and good humor are equally offensive. Only gradually, as the day wears on and his temperature rises, does he become endurable to himself and to others. But see him really awake at 10 P. M. while our blithe lark is in hopeless coma over his books, from which it is hard to rouse him sufficiently to get his boots off for bed, our lean owl-friend, Saturn no longer in the ascendant, with bright eyes and cheery face, is ready for four hours of anything you wish—deep study, or
There’s a lot I want to say about work, but I can only take a minute or two. Who can really decide what the best time for work is? Some say there’s no best time; they’re all just as good, especially for someone deeply engrossed in a big project. Just the other day, I asked Edward Martin, a well-known storyteller, when he finds it best to work. He replied, “Not in the evening, and never between meals!” which might resonate with some of you. Some people work best at night, others in the morning; most students from the past leaned towards the morning. Erasmus, the great example, said, “Never work at night; it dulls the brain and harms your health.” Once, while walking with George Ross through Bedlam, Dr. Savage, who was in charge then, pointed out two large groups of patients—those who felt down in the morning and those who were cheerful. He suggested that mood fluctuates with body temperature—those with very low morning temperatures felt blue, and vice versa. This reflects a truth that might explain the stark differences in students’ habits regarding when they do their best work. Outside the asylum, you also find two main types: the morning lark who loves to watch the sunrise, showing up to breakfast with a bright face, feeling their best at 6 A.M.. We all recognize this type. They’re a stark contrast to the night owl, who shows up with a gloomy morning expression, completely unhappy, feeling robbed by the annoying breakfast bell that interrupts those precious hours of sleep, lacking any appetite, and radiating a profound annoyance toward their cheerful companion, whose morning chatter and good spirits are equally irritating. Gradually, as the day goes on and their temperature rises, they become more tolerable to themselves and others. But just see how awake they are at 10 P.M. while our cheerful lark is sunk in a hopeless stupor over their books, struggling to even take off their boots for bed. Our lean owl-friend, with Saturn no longer in charge, eyes bright and face beaming, is ready for four hours of whatever you want—intense study or something else.
Heart affluence in discoursive talk,
Heart wealth in conversation,
THE DECLINE OF THE DRAMA
By Stephen Leacock
Nineteen hundred and ten was an important year. Halley's comet came along, and some predicted the End of the World. And Stephen Leacock's first humorous book—Literary Lapses—was published. First humorous book, I said, for Mr. Leacock—who is professor of political economy at McGill University, Montreal—had published his Elements of Political Science in 1906.
Nineteen ten was an important year. Halley's Comet showed up, and some people predicted the End of the World. And Stephen Leacock's first humorous book—Literary Lapses—was published. First humorous book, I said, because Mr. Leacock—who is a professor of political economy at McGill University in Montreal—had published his Elements of Political Science in 1906.
It seems to me that I have heard that Literary Lapses was obscurely or privately published in Canada before 1910; that Mr. John Lane, the famous London publisher, was given a copy by some one as he got on a steamer to go home to England; that he read it on the voyage and cabled an offer for it as soon as he landed. This is very vague in my mind, but it sounds probable. At any rate, since that time Professor Leacock's humorous volumes have appeared with gratifying regularity—Nonsense Novels, Behind the Beyond, etc.; and some more serious books too, such as Essays and Literary Studies and The Unsolved Riddle of Social Justice. One of the unsolved riddles of social injustice is, why should Professor Leacock be so much more amusing than most people?
It seems to me that I’ve heard that Literary Lapses was published privately or in a limited way in Canada before 1910; that Mr. John Lane, the well-known London publisher, was given a copy by someone as he boarded a ship to return to England; that he read it during the journey and sent a cable with an offer for it as soon as he arrived. This is pretty hazy in my memory, but it seems likely. In any case, since then, Professor Leacock's humor books have been coming out regularly—Nonsense Novels, Behind the Beyond, etc.; and some more serious works too, like Essays and Literary Studies and The Unsolved Riddle of Social Justice. One of the unsolved questions of social injustice is, why is Professor Leacock so much funnier than most people?
We usually think of him as a Canadian, but he was born in England in 1869.
We usually think of him as Canadian, but he was born in England in 1869.
COMING up home the other night in my car (the Guy Street car), I heard a man who was hanging onto a strap say: "The drama is just turning into a bunch of talk." This set me thinking; and I was glad that it did, because I am being paid by this paper to think once a week, and it is wearing. Some days I never think from morning till night.
COMING home the other night in my car (the Guy Street car), I heard a man hanging onto a strap say, "The drama is just turning into a bunch of talk." This got me thinking, and I was glad it did, because I get paid by this paper to think once a week, and it's exhausting. Some days I don’t think from morning till night.
This decline of the drama is a thing on which I feel deeply and bitterly; for I am, or I have been, something of an actor myself. I have only been in amateur work, I admit, but still I have played some mighty interesting parts. I have acted in Shakespeare as a citizen, I have been a fairy in "A Midsummer Night's Dream," and I was once one end (choice of ends) of a camel in a pantomime. I have had other parts too, such as "A Voice Speaks From Within," or "A Noise Is Heard Without," or a "Bell Rings From Behind," and a lot of things like that. I played as A Noise for seven nights, before crowded houses where people were being turned away from the door; and I have been a Groan and a Sigh and a Tumult, and once I was a "Vision Passes Before the Sleeper."
This decline of drama really bothers me; it’s something I feel deeply and bitterly about because I have been, or at least I used to be, somewhat of an actor myself. I admit I've only done amateur work, but I still had some pretty interesting roles. I acted in Shakespeare as a citizen, played a fairy in "A Midsummer Night's Dream," and once I was one end (pick your end) of a camel in a pantomime. I had other roles too, like "A Voice Speaks From Within," "A Noise Is Heard Without," and "A Bell Rings From Behind," among many others. I played as A Noise for seven nights in front of packed houses where people were being turned away at the door; I've been a Groan, a Sigh, and a Tumult, and once I was a "Vision Passes Before the Sleeper."
So when I talk of acting and of the spirit of the Drama, I speak of what I know.
So when I talk about acting and the essence of Drama, I’m speaking from experience.
Naturally, too, I was brought into contact, very often into quite intimate personal contact, with some of the greatest actors of the day. I don't say it in any way of boasting, but merely because to those of us who love the stage all dramatic souvenirs are interesting. I remember, for example, that when Wilson Barrett played "The Bat" and had to wear the queer suit with the scales, it was I who put the glue on him.
Naturally, I often found myself in close personal contact with some of the greatest actors of the time. I'm not saying this to brag, but because for those of us who love the stage, all theatrical memories are fascinating. I remember, for instance, that when Wilson Barrett performed in "The Bat" and had to wear the strange scaled suit, I was the one who applied the glue on him.
And I recall a conversation with Sir Henry Irving one night when he said to me, "Fetch me a glass of water, will you?" and I said, "Sir Henry, it is not only a pleasure to get it but it is to me, as a humble devotee of the art that you have ennobled, a high privilege. I will go further—" "Do," he said. Henry was like that, quick, sympathetic, what we call in French "vibrant."
And I remember a conversation with Sir Henry Irving one night when he asked me, "Could you grab me a glass of water?" and I replied, "Sir Henry, not only is it a pleasure to get it, but for me, as a humble admirer of the art you've elevated, it's a great privilege. I'll go even further—" "Please do," he said. Henry was like that, quick, understanding, what we would call in French "vibrant."
Forbes Robertson I shall never forget: he owes me 50 cents. And as for Martin Harvey—I simply cannot call him Sir John, we are such dear old friends—he never comes to this town without at once calling in my services to lend a hand in his production. No doubt everybody knows that splendid play in which he appears, called "The Breed of the Treshams."
Forbes Robertson I'll always remember: he owes me 50 cents. And as for Martin Harvey—I just can't call him Sir John, we're such good old friends—he never comes to this town without immediately asking for my help in his production. No doubt everyone knows that amazing play he's in, called "The Breed of the Treshams."
There is a torture scene in it, a most gruesome thing. Harvey, as the hero, has to be tortured, not on the stage itself, but off the stage in a little room at the side. You can hear him howling as he is tortured. Well, it was I who was torturing him. We are so used to working together that Harvey didn't want to let anybody do it but me.
There is a torture scene in it, a really gruesome thing. Harvey, as the hero, has to be tortured, not on the stage itself but in a small room off to the side. You can hear him howling as he is tortured. Well, it was I who was torturing him. We're so used to working together that Harvey didn't want anyone else to do it but me.
So naturally I am a keen friend and student of the Drama: and I hate to think of it going all to pieces.
So naturally, I’m a passionate friend and student of drama, and I hate to think of it falling apart.
The trouble with it is that it is becoming a mere mass of conversation and reflection: nothing happens in it; the action is all going out of it and there is nothing left but thought. When actors begin to think, it is time for a change. They are not fitted for it.
The issue is that it’s turning into just a bunch of talk and contemplation: nothing is happening; all the action is fading away, leaving only ideas. When actors start to overthink, it’s time for a shift. They aren’t suited for that.
Now in my day—I mean when I was at the apogee of my reputation (I think that is the word—it may be apologee—I forget)—things were very different. What we wanted was action—striking, climatic, catastrophic action, in which things not only happened, but happened suddenly and all in a lump.
Now in my day—I mean when I was at the peak of my reputation (I think that’s the right term—it might be apologee—I forget)—things were very different. What we wanted was action—exciting, dramatic, catastrophic action, where things not only happened, but happened suddenly and all at once.
And we always took care that the action happened in some place that was worth while, not simply in an ordinary room with ordinary furniture, the way it is in the new drama. The scene was laid in a lighthouse (top story), or in a mad house (at midnight), or in a power house, or a dog house, or a bath house, in short, in some place with a distinct local color and atmosphere.
And we always made sure that the action took place in a location that was interesting, not just in a regular room with average furniture, like it is in modern plays. The scene was set in a lighthouse (top floor), or in a mental hospital (at midnight), or in a power plant, or a doghouse, or a bathhouse, basically in a place with a unique vibe and character.
I remember in the case of the first play I ever wrote (I write plays, too) the manager to whom I submitted it asked me at once, the moment he glanced at it, "Where is the action of this laid?" "It is laid," I answered, "in the main sewer of a great city." "Good, good," he said; "keep it there."
I remember when I submitted the first play I ever wrote (I write plays, too), the manager looked at it and immediately asked me, "Where does this take place?" I replied, "In the main sewer of a big city." He said, "Great, great; keep it there."
In the case of another play the manager said to me, "What are you doing for atmosphere?" "The opening act," I said, "is in a steam laundry." "Very good," he answered as he turned over the pages, "and have you brought in a condemned cell?" I told him that I had not. "That's rather unfortunate," he said, "because we are especially anxious to bring in a condemned cell. Three of the big theaters have got them this season, and I think we ought to have it in. Can you do it?" "Yes," I said, "I can, if it's wanted. I'll look through the cast, and no doubt I can find one at least of them that ought to be put to death." "Yes, yes," said the manager enthusiastically, "I am sure you can."
In another play, the manager asked me, "What are you doing for atmosphere?" "The opening act," I replied, "is set in a steam laundry." "Great," he said as he flipped through the pages, "have you included a condemned cell?" I told him I hadn't. "That's a bit unfortunate," he said, "because we're really eager to include a condemned cell. Three of the major theaters have them this season, and I think we should have one, too. Can you arrange it?" "Yes," I said, "I can if it's needed. I'll check the cast, and I'm sure I can find at least one person who deserves to be put to death." "Yes, yes," the manager responded enthusiastically, "I'm sure you can."
But I think of all the settings that we used, the lighthouse plays were the best. There is something about a lighthouse that you don't get in a modern drawing room. What it is, I don't know; but there's a difference. I always have liked a lighthouse play, and never have enjoyed acting so much, have never thrown myself into acting so deeply, as in a play of that sort.
But I think about all the places we used, and the lighthouse plays were the best. There’s something about a lighthouse that you just don’t get in a modern living room. What that is, I don’t know; but there’s definitely a difference. I’ve always loved a lighthouse play, and I’ve never enjoyed acting so much, never immersed myself in acting as deeply, as in a play like that.
There is something about a lighthouse—the way you see it in the earlier scenes—with the lantern shining out over the black waters that suggests security, fidelity, faithfulness, to a trust. The stage used generally to be dim in the first part of a lighthouse play, and you could see the huddled figures of the fishermen and their wives on the foreshore pointing out to the sea (the back of the stage).
There’s something about a lighthouse—the way you see it in the earlier scenes—with the light shining out over the dark water that suggests safety, loyalty, and faith in a promise. The stage was usually dim in the first part of a lighthouse play, and you could see the gathered figures of the fishermen and their wives on the shore, pointing out to the sea (the back of the stage).
"See," one cried with his arm extended, "there is lightning in yon sky." (I was the lightning and that my cue for it): "God help all the poor souls at sea to-night!" Then a woman cried, "Look! Look! a boat upon the reef!" And as she said it I had to rush round and work the boat to make it go up and down properly. Then there was more lightning, and some one screamed out, "Look! See! there's a woman in the boat!"
"Look," one shouted with his arm outstretched, "there's lightning in that sky." (I was the lightning and that was my signal to act): "God help all the poor souls at sea tonight!" Then a woman yelled, "Look! There's a boat on the reef!" And as she said that, I had to rush around and maneuver the boat to make it rise and fall correctly. Then there was more lightning, and someone screamed, "Look! There's a woman in the boat!"
There wasn't really; it was me; but in the darkness it was all the same, and of course the heroine herself couldn't be there yet because she had to be downstairs getting dressed to be drowned. Then they all cried out, "Poor soul! she's doomed," and all the fishermen ran up and down making a noise.
There wasn't really; it was me; but in the darkness it was all the same, and of course the heroine herself couldn't be there yet because she had to be downstairs getting ready to be drowned. Then they all shouted, "Poor soul! She's doomed," and all the fishermen ran around making a commotion.
Fishermen in those plays used to get fearfully excited; and what with the excitement and the darkness and the bright beams of the lighthouse falling on the wet oilskins, and the thundering of the sea upon the reef—ah! me, those were plays! That was acting! And to think that there isn't a single streak of lightning in any play on the boards this year!
Fishermen in those plays used to get really fired up; and with all the excitement, the darkness, and the bright beams of the lighthouse shining on the wet oilskins, along with the crashing of the sea against the reef—oh man, those were plays! That was acting! And to think there isn't a single flash of lightning in any play on stage this year!
And then the kind of climax that a play like this used to have! The scene shifted right at the moment of the excitement, and lo! we are in the tower, the top story of the lighthouse, interior scene. All is still and quiet within, with the bright light of the reflectors flooding the little room, and the roar of the storm heard like muffled thunder outside.
And then the kind of climax that a play like this usually has! The scene changes right at the peak of the excitement, and suddenly, we find ourselves in the tower, the top floor of the lighthouse, an interior scene. It’s completely still and quiet inside, with the bright light from the reflectors filling the small room, and the sound of the storm heard like muffled thunder outside.
The lighthouse keeper trims his lamps. How firm and quiet and rugged he looks. The snows of sixty winters are on his head, but his eye is clear and his grip strong. Hear the howl of the wind as he opens the door and steps forth upon the iron balcony, eighty feet above the water, and peers out upon the storm.
The lighthouse keeper adjusts his lamps. He looks strong, calm, and tough. Sixty winters have left their mark on his head, but his eyesight is sharp and his grip is strong. Listen to the wind howl as he opens the door and steps out onto the iron balcony, eighty feet above the water, looking out at the storm.
And then, as he comes in from the storm to the still room, the climax breaks. A man staggers into the room in oilskins, drenched, wet, breathless. (They all staggered in these plays, and in the new drama they walk, and the effect is feebleness itself.) He points to the sea. "A boat! A boat upon the reef! With a woman in it."
And then, as he comes in from the storm to the calm room, the climax happens. A man stumbles into the room in a raincoat, soaked, breathing heavily. (They all stumbled in these plays, and in the new drama they walk, and the effect is total weakness.) He points to the sea. "A boat! A boat on the reef! With a woman in it."
And the lighthouse keeper knows that it is his only daughter—the only one that he has—who is being cast to death upon the reef. Then comes the dilemma. They want him for the lifeboat; no one can take it through the surf but him. You know that because the other man says so himself.
And the lighthouse keeper realizes that it’s his only daughter—the only one he has—who is being thrown to her death on the reef. Then comes the tough decision. They need him for the lifeboat; no one else can handle it through the surf except him. You know this because the other man says so himself.
But if he goes in the boat then the great light will go out. Untended it cannot live in the storm. And if it goes out—ah! if it goes out—ask of the angry waves and the resounding rocks of what to-night's long toll of death must be without the light!
But if he gets in the boat, then the great light will go out. Left alone, it can't survive the storm. And if it goes out—oh! if it goes out—just ask the angry waves and the echoing rocks about the death toll tonight without the light!
I wish you could have seen it—you who only see the drawing-room plays of to-day—the scene when the lighthouse man draws himself up, calm and resolute, and says: "My place is here. God's will be done." And you know that as he says it and turns quietly to his lamps again, the boat is drifting, at that very moment, to the rocks.
I wish you could have seen it—you who only watch today’s drawing-room plays—the moment when the lighthouse keeper stands tall, calm and determined, and says, "My place is here. May God's will be done." And you know that as he says this and calmly turns back to his lamps, the boat is drifting, right at that moment, toward the rocks.
"How did they save her?" My dear sir, if you can ask that question you little understand the drama as it was. Save her? No, of course they didn't save her. What we wanted in the Old Drama was reality and force, no matter how wild and tragic it might be. They did not save her. They found her the next day, in the concluding scene—all that was left of her when she was dashed upon the rocks. Her ribs were broken. Her bottom boards had been smashed in, her gunwale was gone—in short, she was a wreck.
"How did they save her?" My dear sir, if you can ask that question, you really don’t understand the drama as it was. Save her? No, of course they didn't save her. What we wanted in the Old Drama was reality and intensity, no matter how wild and tragic it was. They didn’t save her. They found her the next day, in the final scene—all that was left of her when she crashed against the rocks. Her ribs were broken. Her bottom boards were smashed in, her gunwale was gone—in short, she was a wreck.
The girl? Oh, yes, certainly they saved the girl. That kind of thing was always taken care of. You see just as the lighthouse man said "God's will be done," his eye fell on a long coil of rope, hanging there. Providential, wasn't it? But then we were not ashamed to use Providence in the Old Drama. So he made a noose in it and threw it over the balcony and hauled the girl up on it. I used to hook her on to it every night.
The girl? Oh, yes, they definitely saved her. That kind of thing was always handled. You see, just as the lighthouse keeper said, "God's will be done," his gaze landed on a long piece of rope hanging there. Quite a coincidence, right? But back then, we didn't hesitate to use divine intervention in the Old Drama. So he made a loop with it and tossed it over the balcony to pull the girl up. I used to attach her to it every night.
AMERICA AND THE ENGLISH TRADITION
By Harry Morgan Ayres
This admirable summary of Anglo-American history first appeared (February, 1920) as an editorial in the Weekly Review. It seemed to me then, and still does, as a model in that form of writing, perfect in lucidity, temperance and good sense. Mr. Ayres is a member of the faculty of Columbia University (Department of English) and also one of the editors of the Weekly Review. Beowulf, Chaucer, Shakespeare and Seneca seem to be his favorite hobbies.
This impressive summary of Anglo-American history was first published (February, 1920) as an editorial in the Weekly Review. It struck me at the time, and still does, as a great example of that style of writing, flawless in clarity, moderation, and common sense. Mr. Ayres is a faculty member at Columbia University (Department of English) and also one of the editors of the Weekly Review. Beowulf, Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Seneca appear to be his favorite interests.
To sum up the gist of Anglo-American relations in half a dozen pages, as Mr. Ayres does here, is surely a remarkable achievement.
To summarize the essence of Anglo-American relations in just six pages, as Mr. Ayres does here, is definitely an impressive accomplishment.
THE recently established chair in the history, literature, and institutions of the United States which is to be shared among the several universities of Great Britain, is quite different from the exchange professorships of sometimes unhappy memory. It is not at all the idea to carry over one of our professors each year and indoctrinate him with the true culture at its source. The occupant of the chair will be, if the announced intention is carried out, quite as often British as American, and quite as likely a public man as a professor. The chief object is to bring to England a better knowledge of the United States, and a purpose more laudable can scarcely be imagined. Peace and prosperity will endure in the world in some very precise relation to the extent to which England succeeds in understanding us.
The newly established chair in the history, literature, and institutions of the United States, which will be shared across several universities in Great Britain, is very different from the sometimes disappointing exchange professorships of the past. The idea is not to send one of our professors each year to learn about our culture at its source. The person in this position will, if the stated intention is followed through, be just as likely to be British as American and just as likely to be a public figure as an academic. The main goal is to enhance understanding of the United States in England, and it’s hard to imagine a more admirable purpose. Global peace and prosperity will depend significantly on how well England comprehends us.
It is not an illusion to suppose that our understanding of the British is on the whole better than theirs of us. The British Empire is a large and comparatively simple fact, now conspicuously before the world for a long time. The United States was, in British eyes, until recently, a comparatively insignificant fact, yet vastly more complicated than they imagined. Each, of course, perfectly knew the faults of the other, assessed with an unerring cousinly eye. The American bragged in a nasal whine, the Briton patronized in a throaty burble. Whoever among the struggling nations of the world might win, England saw to it that she never lost; your Yankee was content with the more ignoble triumphs of merchandising, willing to cheapen life if he could only add to his dollars. But the excellence of English political institutions and methods, the charm of English life, the tremendous power of the Empire for promoting freedom and civilization in the world, these are things which Americans have long recognized and in a way understood. Anything like an equivalent British appreciation of America in the large seems confined to a very few honorable exceptions among them. Admiration for Niagara, which is half British anyway, or enthusiasm for the "Wild West"—your better-class Englishman always thrills to the frontier—is no step at all toward rightly appreciating America.
It’s not an illusion to think that our understanding of the British is generally better than theirs of us. The British Empire has been a large, relatively straightforward fact that’s been in the spotlight for a long time. The United States, in British eyes, was until recently a relatively minor issue, but way more complicated than they thought. Each side was well aware of the other's faults, viewed with a familiar, critical eye. Americans would boast with a nasal twang, while the British would condescend with a deep, drawn-out tone. No matter who among the competing nations might win, England ensured that she never lost; your typical American was satisfied with the less honorable victories of business, ready to cheapen life if it meant boosting his profits. However, the strengths of English political systems and practices, the appeal of English culture, and the immense power of the Empire to promote freedom and civilization worldwide are recognized and somewhat understood by Americans. In contrast, a comparable British appreciation of America on the whole seems limited to just a few notable exceptions among them. Admiration for Niagara, which is partially British anyway, or excitement about the "Wild West"—your upper-class Englishman always gets excited about the frontier—doesn’t come close to truly understanding America.
To no inconsiderable extent this is America's own fault. She does not present to the world a record that is easily read. It is obvious, for instance—and so obvious that it is not often enough stated—that America has and will continue to have a fundamentally English civilization. English law is the basis of her law. English speech is her speech, and if with a difference, it is a difference that the philologist, all things considered, finds amazingly small. English literature is her literature—Chaucer and Shakespeare hers because her blood then coursed indistinguishably through the English heart they knew so well; Milton, Dryden, and the Queen Anne men hers, because she was still a part of England; the later men hers by virtue of affectionate acquaintanceship and a generous and not inconsiderable rivalry. English history, in short, is her history. The struggles of the thirteenth century through which law and parliament came into being, the struggles of the seventeenth century through which law and parliament came to rule, are America's struggles upon which she can look back with the satisfaction that some things that have been done in the world need never be undone or done over again, whatever the room for improvement may still be. Americans, no less than British, recognize that independence was largely an accidental result of a war which sprang out of a false theory of economics, but whose conclusion carried with it a lesson in the management of empire which subsequent history shows the British to have learned thoroughly and for the benefit of all concerned. American independence, however, once established, pointed a way to democratic freedom which England hastened to follow. This we know. And yet—
To a great extent, this is America's own fault. She doesn't show the world a record that's easy to understand. It's clear, for example—and so clear that it's not stated often enough—that America has and will continue to have a fundamentally English civilization. English law is the foundation of her law. English is her language, and although there are differences, a linguist, on the whole, finds them surprisingly minor. English literature is her literature—Chaucer and Shakespeare belong to her because her blood once flowed indistinguishably through the English heart they so well understood; Milton, Dryden, and the Queen Anne writers are hers since she was still part of England; the later writers are hers out of a fond familiarity and a significant, friendly rivalry. In short, English history is her history. The struggles of the thirteenth century, during which law and parliament were born, and the struggles of the seventeenth century, during which law and parliament came to power, are America's struggles, and she can look back on them with satisfaction, knowing that some things done in the world need never be undone or redone, regardless of any remaining room for improvement. Americans, just like the British, acknowledge that independence was largely an accidental result of a war that arose from a flawed economic theory, but the outcome taught a valuable lesson in managing an empire, which British history shows they learned well for everyone's benefit. American independence, once achieved, paved the way for democratic freedom that England was quick to adopt. We know this. And yet—
And yet we allow these obvious and fundamental considerations to become marvelously obscured. We allow England's failure to solve an insoluble Irish problem to arouse in us an attitude of mind possibly excusable in some Irishmen, but wholly inexcusable in any American. We allow a sentimental regard for some immigrant from Eastern Europe, who comes to us with a philosophy born of conditions that in English-speaking lands ceased to be centuries ago, to make us pretend to see in him the true expression of America's traditional ideals. We allow ourselves to be far too easy with the phrase, "He is not pro-German, he is merely anti-British." Why are they anti-British? Why should they be permitted to make it falsely appear that recognition of the English basis of America involves approval of everything that England in her history may or may not have done? Why should they be allowed to pretend that disapproval of some particular act of England justifies repudiation of most of the things by virtue of which we are what we are? America from the first has been part of the great English experiment—great because it is capable of learning from experience.
And yet we let these obvious and fundamental issues become incredibly unclear. We let England's failure to solve an impossible Irish problem lead us to have a mindset that might be excusable for some Irish people, but is completely unjustifiable for any American. We let a sentimental view of some immigrant from Eastern Europe, who comes to us with ideas shaped by conditions that haven’t existed in English-speaking countries for centuries, make us pretend he embodies America’s traditional ideals. We make it too easy to say, "He isn’t pro-German, he’s just anti-British." Why are they anti-British? Why should they be allowed to make it seem like acknowledging the English roots of America means approving of everything England has done throughout its history? Why should they be permitted to pretend that disapproving of a specific action by England justifies rejecting most of the reasons why we are who we are? America has always been part of the great English experiment—great because it can learn from experience.
The world has put a big investment in blood and treasure, and all that they imply, into the education of England. It is satisfied—the world's response to Germany's insolent challenge is the proof of it—that its pains have been well bestowed. England is more nearly fit than any other nation to wield the power that is hers. That is not to deny the peculiar virtues of other nations; indeed, these virtues have largely contributed to the result. Italy has educated her; France has educated her; we have done something; and Germany. In result, she is not perfect—the English would perhaps least of all assert that—but she has learned a great deal and held herself steady while she learned it. It is a bigger job than the world cares to undertake to teach any other nation so much. Nor would it be at all likely to succeed so well. For what England has to offer the world in return is not simply her institutions; it is not merely a formula for the effective discharge of police duty throughout the world; it is the English freeman, whether he hail from Canada, Australia, Africa, or the uttermost isles of the sea.
The world has made a significant investment in resources and efforts into educating England. The positive response to Germany's audacious challenge proves that this investment has been worthwhile. England is better prepared than any other nation to take on the power that is rightfully hers. This doesn't overlook the unique strengths of other countries; in fact, those strengths have greatly contributed to this outcome. Italy has influenced her; France has influenced her; we have played a part; and Germany too. As a result, she is not perfect—English people would likely be the first to acknowledge that—but she has learned a lot and has remained steady while doing so. Teaching any other nation so much is a greater task than the world cares to take on. Nor is it likely to succeed as well. What England has to offer the world in return isn't just her institutions; it's not just a method for effectively enforcing law and order globally; it's the English freeman, whether he comes from Canada, Australia, Africa, or the farthest islands of the sea.
A most adaptable fellow, this freeman, doing all sorts of work everywhere, and with tremendous powers of assimilation. Consider him in his origins. He began by assimilating fully his own weight in Danes, while remaining an English freeman. He then perforce accepted a Norman king, as he had accepted a Danish one, hoping, as always, that the king would not trouble him too much. But when Norman William, who was very ill-informed about the breed, killed off most of his natural leaders and harried the rest into villeiny, how did he manage in a small matter of two hundred years or so to make an English gentleman not only of himself but of all the rag-tag of adventurers who had come over with William and since? How did he contrive, out of a band of exiles fleeing from an Egypt of ecclesiastical tyranny, broken younger sons, artisans out of a job, speculators, bondmen, Swedes, Dutchmen, and what not, to make America? Is he one likely to lose his bearings when in his America the age-old problem again heaves in view? This is a job he has been working at pretty successfully for more than a thousand years. Grant him a moment to realize himself afresh in the face of it. Don't expect him to stop and give a coherent explanation of what he is doing. He wouldn't be the true son of the English tradition that he is if he could do that. Perhaps the occupants of the new chair can do something of the sort for him.
This guy is really adaptable, doing all kinds of work everywhere, and he's able to pick things up quickly. Think about where he came from. He started by fully blending in with a bunch of Danes, while still being an English freeman. Then he had to accept a Norman king, just like he accepted a Danish one, always hoping that the king wouldn’t bother him too much. But when Norman William, who didn’t really understand the people, got rid of most of their natural leaders and forced the rest into servitude, how did he manage over just two hundred years to turn not only himself but also all the random adventurers who came over with William and since then into English gentlemen? How did he somehow create America from a group of exiles running away from a place of religious oppression, broken younger sons, unemployed workers, opportunists, bondmen, Swedes, Dutchmen, and more? Is he really someone likely to get lost when the same old problems come up in his America? He’s been dealing with this pretty successfully for over a thousand years. Give him a moment to find himself again in the face of it. Don’t expect him to pause and explain clearly what he’s doing. He wouldn’t be the true son of the English tradition if he could. Maybe the people in the new position can help him figure that out.
THE RUSSIAN QUARTER
By Thomas Burke
Thomas Burke, a young newspaper man in London, came into quick recognition with his first book, Nights in Town (published in America as Nights in London) in 1915. His first really popular success, however, was Limehouse Nights, less satisfactory to those who had read the first book, as it was largely a repetition of the same material in fiction form. (In fact, Mr. Burke holds what must be almost a record among authors by having worked over nearly the identical substance in four different versions—as essays and sketches, in Nights in Town; as short stories, in Limehouse Nights; as a novel, in Twinkletoes; as poetry, in The Song Book of Quong Lee of Limehouse.)
Thomas Burke, a young journalist in London, quickly gained recognition with his first book, Nights in Town (published in America as Nights in London) in 1915. However, his first major success was Limehouse Nights, which was less satisfying to those who had read the first book, as it mainly repeated the same material in a fictional format. (In fact, Mr. Burke probably holds a record among authors for having revised nearly the same content in four different formats: as essays and sketches in Nights in Town; as short stories in Limehouse Nights; as a novel in Twinkletoes; and as poetry in The Song Book of Quong Lee of Limehouse.)
Mr. Burke has specialized on London, and with great ability. In the Limehouse series his colorings seem just a little too consciously vivid, his roguishness a little too studied, to be quite satisfying. The Outer Circle, a volume of rambles in the London suburbs, is to me more truly a work of art.
Mr. Burke has specialized in London, and he does it exceptionally well. In the Limehouse series, his colors seem just a bit too deliberately bright, and his mischievousness feels a little too crafted to be fully satisfying. The Outer Circle, a collection of strolls through the London suburbs, feels more like a genuine work of art to me.
I HAD known the quarter for many years before it interested me. It was not until I was prowling around on a Fleet Street assignment that I learned to hate it. A murder had been committed over a café in Lupin Street; a popular murder, fruity, cleverly done, and with a sex interest. Of course every newspaper and agency developed a virtuous anxiety to track the culprit, and all resources were directed to that end. Journalism is perhaps the only profession in which so fine a public spirit may be found. So it was that the North Country paper of which I was a hanger-on flung every available man into the fighting line, and the editor told me that I might, in place of the casual paragraphs for the London Letter, do something good on the Vassiloff murder.
I HAD known about the area for many years before it caught my interest. It wasn’t until I was wandering around on a Fleet Street assignment that I learned to hate it. A murder had taken place over a café on Lupin Street; it was a sensational murder, dramatic, expertly executed, and with a sexual angle. Naturally, every newspaper and agency felt a strong urge to find the killer, and all resources were directed towards that goal. Journalism might be the only profession where such a strong sense of public duty can be found. So the North Country paper I was associated with sent every available person into the fray, and the editor told me that instead of writing the usual paragraphs for the London Letter, I could do something substantial on the Vassiloff murder.
It was a night of cold rain, and the pavements were dashed with smears of light from the shop windows. Through the streaming streets my hansom leaped; and as I looked from the window, and noted the despondent biliousness of Bethnal Green, I realized that the grass withereth, the flower fadeth.
It was a cold, rainy night, and the sidewalks were streaked with light from the shop windows. My cab sped through the wet streets, and as I looked out the window and noticed the gloomy dreariness of Bethnal Green, I realized that the grass withers and the flowers fade.
I dismissed the cab at Brick Lane, and, continuing the tradition which had been instilled into me by my predecessor on the London Letter, I turned into one of the hostelries and had a vodka to keep the cold out. Little Russia was shutting up. The old shawled women, who sit at every corner with huge baskets of black bread and sweet cakes, were departing beneath umbrellas. The stalls of Osborn Street, usually dressed with foreign-looking confectionery, were also retiring. Indeed, everybody seemed to be slinking away, and as I sipped my vodka, and felt it burn me with raw fire, I cursed news editors and all publics which desired to read about murders. I was perfectly sure that I shouldn't do the least good; so I had another, and gazed through the kaleidoscopic window, rushing with rain, at the cheerful world that held me.
I got out of the cab at Brick Lane, and, following the tradition my predecessor on the London Letter taught me, I went into a pub and had a vodka to warm up. Little Russia was closing down. The old women wrapped in shawls, who sit at every corner with big baskets of black bread and sweet cakes, were leaving under umbrellas. The stalls on Osborn Street, usually filled with exotic-looking sweets, were also shutting down. In fact, everyone seemed to be sneaking away, and as I sipped my vodka, feeling the fiery burn, I cursed news editors and all the readers who wanted to hear about murders. I was completely convinced that I wouldn’t be able to help at all; so I had another drink and looked through the rain-splattered, kaleidoscopic window at the cheerful world surrounding me.
Oh, so sad it is, this quarter! By day the streets are a depression, with their frowzy doss-houses and their vapor-baths. Gray and sickly is the light. Gray and sickly, too, are the leering shops, and gray and sickly are the people and the children. Everything has followed the grass and the flowers. Childhood has no place; so above the roofs you may see the surly points of a Council School. Such games as happen are played but listlessly, and each little face is smirched. The gaunt warehouses hardly support their lopping heads, and the low, beetling, gabled houses of the alleys seem for ever to brood on nights of bitter adventure. Fit objects for contempt by day they may be, but when night creeps upon London, the hideous darkness that can almost be touched, then their faces become very powers of terror, and the cautious soul, wandered from the comfort of the main streets, walks and walks in a frenzy, seeking outlet and finding none. Sometimes a hoarse laugh will break sharp on his ear. Then he runs.
Oh, how sad this area is right now! During the day, the streets feel depressing, with their rundown shelters and their steam baths. The light is gray and unhealthy. The shops look gray and sickly, and so do the people and the children. Everything has faded like the grass and flowers. There's no place for childhood; you can see the grim outline of a Council School above the roofs. The games that happen are played without enthusiasm, and every small face is smudged. The skeletal warehouses barely hold up their drooping roofs, and the low, overhanging houses in the alleys seem to constantly dwell on nights filled with harsh experiences. They may seem objects of contempt during the day, but when night falls in London, and the thick darkness feels almost tangible, their faces become frightening, and anyone who strays from the comfort of the main streets walks around in a panic, looking for a way out and finding none. Sometimes a harsh laugh pierces the silence. Then they run.
Well, I finished my second, and then sauntered out. As I was passing a cruel-looking passage, a girl stepped forward. She looked at me. I looked at her. She had the haunting melancholy of Russia in her face, but her voice was as the voice of Cockaigne. For she spoke and said:—
Well, I finished my second drink, and then walked out. As I was passing a harsh-looking hallway, a girl stepped forward. She looked at me. I looked at her. She had the deep sadness of Russia in her expression, but her voice was like the voice of paradise. Then she spoke and said:—
"Funny-looking little guy, ain't you?"
"Funny-looking little guy, aren't you?"
She giggled....
She laughed....
I said I felt sure I should do no good on the Vassiloff murder. I didn't. For just then two of her friends came out of the court, each with a boy. It was apparent that she had no boy. I had no idea what the occasion might be, but the other four marched ahead, crying, "Come on!" And, surprised, yet knowing of no good reason for being surprised, I felt the girl's arm slip into mine, and we joined the main column....
I said I was pretty sure I wouldn't be able to help with the Vassiloff murder. I didn't. Just then, two of her friends came out of the courthouse, each with a guy. It was clear she didn’t have a guy. I had no clue what the situation was, but the other four moved ahead, shouting, "Come on!" And, confused but without a good reason to be confused, I felt the girl’s arm slip into mine, and we fell in with the main group...
That is one of London's greatest charms: it is always ready to toss you little encounters of this sort, if you are out for them.
That’s one of the best things about London: it's always willing to give you unexpected moments like this if you’re open to them.
Across the road we went, through mire and puddle, and down a long, winding court. At about midway our friends disappeared, and, suddenly drawn to the right, I was pushed from behind up a steep, fusty stair. Then I knew where we were going. We were going to the tenements where most of the Russians meet of an evening. The atmosphere in these places is a little more cheerful than that of the cafés—if you can imagine a Russian ever rising to cheerfulness. Most of the girls lodge over the milliners' shops, and thither their friends resort. Every establishment here has a piano, for music, with them, is a somber passion rather than a diversion. You will not hear comic opera, but if you want to climb the lost heights of melody, stand in Bell Yard, and listen to a piano, lost in the high glooms, wailing the heart of Chopin, or Rubinstein or Glazounoff through the fingers of pale, moist girls, while the ghost of Peter the Painter parades the naphtha'd highways.
We crossed the road, trudging through mud and puddles, and made our way down a long, winding alley. About halfway through, our friends vanished, and I was suddenly pushed to the right and up a steep, musty staircase. That's when I realized where we were headed. We were going to the tenements where most of the Russians gather in the evenings. The vibe in these places is a bit more upbeat than in the cafés—if you can picture a Russian ever being cheerful. Most of the girls live above the milliners' shops, and that’s where their friends go to hang out. Every place here has a piano because, for them, music is a heavy passion rather than just entertainment. You won’t hear comic opera, but if you want to experience the deep beauty of melody, stand in Bell Yard and listen to a piano, lost in the shadowy corners, playing the emotional pieces of Chopin, Rubinstein, or Glazounoff through the fingers of pale, damp girls, while the ghost of Peter the Painter roams the naphtha-lit streets.
At the top of the stair I was pushed into a dark, fusty room, and guided to a low, fusty sofa or bed. Then some one struck a match, and a lamp was lit and set on the mantelshelf. It flung a soft, caressing radiance on its shabby home, and on its mistress, and on the other girls and boys. The boys were tough youngsters of the district, evidently very much at home, smoking Russian cigarettes and settling themselves on the bed in a manner that seemed curiously continental in Cockney toughs. I doubt if you would have loved the girls at that moment; and yet ... you know ... their black or brassy hair, their untidiness, and the cotton blouses half-dropped from their tumultuous breasts....
At the top of the stairs, I was pushed into a dark, musty room and led to a low, worn sofa or bed. Then someone struck a match, and a lamp was lit and placed on the mantel. It cast a warm, gentle glow over its shabby surroundings, its owner, and the other girls and boys. The boys were tough local kids, clearly comfortable in the space, smoking Russian cigarettes and lounging on the bed in a way that felt surprisingly continental for Cockney toughs. I doubt you would have been drawn to the girls at that moment; and yet... you know... their black or brassy hair, their messy appearance, and the cotton blouses sliding off their unruly figures...
The girl who had collared me disappeared for a moment, and then brought a tray of Russian tea. "Help 'selves, boys!" We did so, and, watching the others, I discovered that it was the correct thing to lemon the ladies' tea for them and stir it well and light their cigarettes. I did so for Katarina—that was her name—while she watched me with little truant locks of hair running everywhere, and a slow, alluring smile that seemed to hold all the agony and mystery of the steppes.
The girl who had put a collar on me vanished for a moment and then came back with a tray of Russian tea. "Help yourselves, boys!" We did, and while observing the others, I realized it was proper to add lemon to the ladies' tea for them, stir it well, and light their cigarettes. I did this for Katarina—that was her name—while she watched me with playful strands of hair falling everywhere and a slow, captivating smile that seemed to capture all the pain and mystery of the steppes.
The room, on which the wallpaper hung in dank strips, contained a full-sized bed and a chair bedstead, a washstand, a samovar, a potpourri of a carpet, and certain mysteries of feminine toilet. A rickety three-legged table stood by the window, and Katarina's robes hung in a dainty riot of frill and color behind the door, which only shut when you thrust a peg of wood through a wired catch.
The room, with its damp wallpaper peeling in strips, had a full-sized bed, a chair bed, a washstand, a samovar, a mishmash of a carpet, and some unexplainable feminine items. A wobbly three-legged table was by the window, and Katarina's clothes were hung in a charming mix of frills and colors behind the door, which only closed if you shoved a wooden peg through a wired catch.
One of the boys sprawled himself, in clumsy luxury, on the bed, and his girl arranged herself at his side, and when she was settled her hair tumbled in a shower of hairpins, and everybody laughed like children. The other girl went to the piano, and her boy squatted on the floor at her feet.
One of the boys lounged awkwardly on the bed, and his girl settled next to him. Once she was comfortable, her hair fell out in a cascade of hairpins, and everyone laughed like kids. The other girl went to the piano while her boy sat on the floor at her feet.
She began to play.... You would not understand, I suppose, the intellectual emotion of the situation. It is more than curious to sit in these rooms, in the filthiest spot in London, and listen to Moszkowsky, Tchaikowsky, and Sibelius, played by a factory girl. It is ... something indefinable. I had visited similar places in Stepney before, but then I had not had a couple of vodkas, and I had not been taken in tow by an unknown girl. They play and play, while tea and cigarettes, and sometimes vodka or whisky, go round; and as the room gets warmer, so does one's sense of smell get sharper; so do the pale faces get moister; and so does one long more and more for a breath of cold air from the Ural Mountains. The best you can do is to ascend to the flat roof, and take a deep breath of Spitalfields ozone. Then back to the room for more tea and more music.
She started to play.... You probably wouldn't get the deep feeling of the moment. It's more than just interesting to sit in these rooms, in the dirtiest part of London, and listen to Moszkowsky, Tchaikovsky, and Sibelius, played by a factory girl. It's... something hard to describe. I had been to similar spots in Stepney before, but back then, I hadn’t had a couple of vodkas, and I hadn’t been taken under the wing of a stranger. They keep playing and playing, while tea, cigarettes, and sometimes vodka or whiskey circulate; and as the room heats up, so does your sense of smell become sharper; the pale faces get damper; and you start to crave a breath of cool air from the Ural Mountains more and more. The best you can do is head up to the flat roof and take a deep breath of Spitalfields ozone. Then it's back to the room for more tea and more music.
Sanya played.... Despite the unventilated room, the greasy appointments, and other details that would have turned the stomach of Kensington, that girl at the piano, her dress cunningly disarranged, playing, as no one would have dreamed she could play, the finer intensities of Wieniawski and Moussorgsky, shook all sense of responsibility from me. The burdens of life vanished. News editors and their assignments be damned. Enjoy yourself, was what the cold, insidious music said. Take your moments when the fates send them; that was life's best lesson. Snatch the joy of the fleeting moment. Why ponder on time and tears?
Sanya played.... Despite the stuffy room, the greasy furnishings, and other things that would have made Kensington sick, that girl at the piano, her dress artfully messed up, played, in a way that no one would have believed she could, the deeper emotions of Wieniawski and Moussorgsky, making me forget all my responsibilities. All the burdens of life disappeared. Forget the news editors and their tasks. Enjoy yourself, was what the cold, sneaky music seemed to say. Take your chances when they come your way; that’s life’s best lesson. Grab the joy of the moment before it passes. Why dwell on time and tears?
Devilish little fingers they were, Sanya's. Her technique was not perhaps all that it might have been; she might not have won the Gold Medal of our white-shirted academies, but she had enough temperament to make half a dozen Bechstein Hall virtuosi. From valse to nocturne, from sonata to prelude, her fancy ran. With crashing chords she dropped from "L'Automne Bacchanale" to the Nocturne in E flat; scarcely murmured of that, then tripped elvishly into Moszkowsky's Waltz, and from that she dropped to a song of Tchaikowsky, almost heartbreaking in its childish beauty, and then to the lecherous music of the second act of "Tristan." Mazurka, polonaise, and nocturne wailed in the stuffy chamber; her little hands lit up the enchanted gloom of the place with bright thrills, until the bed and the dingy surroundings faded into phantoms and left only two stark souls in colloquy: Katarina's and mine.
Sanya had devilish little fingers. Her technique might not have been perfect; she probably wouldn’t have won the Gold Medal at our formal academies, but she had enough flair to rival a dozen virtuosos at Bechstein Hall. She played everything from waltzes to nocturnes, sonatas to preludes—her imagination had no limits. With crashing chords, she leaped from "L'Automne Bacchanale" to the Nocturne in E flat; hardly pausing, she then flitted into Moszkowsky's Waltz, before transitioning to a Tchaikovsky song that was almost heartbreakingly beautiful in its childlike innocence, and then to the sultry music from the second act of "Tristan." Mazurkas, polonaises, and nocturnes echoed in the stuffy room; her little hands brightened the dim atmosphere with lively thrills, until the bed and the dreary surroundings faded into shadows, leaving only two stark souls in conversation: Katarina’s and mine.
Katarina had settled, I forget how, on the sofa, and was reclining very comfortably with her head on my shoulder and both arms about me. We did not talk. No questions passed as to why we had picked one another up. There we were, warmed with vodka and tea, at eleven o'clock at night, five stories above the clamorous world, while her friend shook the silly souls out of us. With the shy boldness of my native country, I stretched a hand and inclosed her fingers. She smiled; a curious smile that no other girl in London could have given; not a flushed smile, or a startled smile, or a satisfied smile, or a coy smile; but a smile of companionship, which seemed to have realized the tragedy of our living. So it was that she had, by slow stages, reached her comfortable position, for as my hand wandered from finger to wrist, from wrist to soft, rounded arm, and so inclosed her neck, she slipped and buried me in an avalanche of flaming, scented tresses.
Katarina had somehow settled on the sofa, reclining comfortably with her head on my shoulder and her arms around me. We didn’t talk. No questions were asked about how we ended up together. There we were, warmed by vodka and tea, at eleven at night, five stories above the noisy world, while her friend tried to lighten the mood. With the shy boldness of my homeland, I reached out and held her fingers. She smiled—a unique smile that no other girl in London could have given; not a flushed smile, or a startled smile, or a satisfied smile, or a coy smile; but a smile of companionship, recognizing the tragedy of our lives. So, she had gradually found her comfortable position, as my hand moved from her fingers to her wrist, from her wrist to her soft, rounded arm, and then to her neck, where she slipped and enveloped me in a cascade of fiery, fragrant hair.
Sanya at the piano shot a glance over her shoulder, a very sad-gay glance; she laughed, curiously, I almost said foreignly. I felt somehow as though I had been taken complete possession of by these people. I hardly belonged to myself. Fleet Street was but a street of dream. I seemed now to be awake and in an adorable captivity.
Sanya at the piano glanced back at me, a look that was both sad and joyful; she laughed in a way that felt strange, almost foreign. I felt like these people had completely taken me over. I barely felt like I belonged to myself. Fleet Street was just a dream. Now, I felt awake and in a beautiful kind of captivity.
With a final volley of chords, the pianist slid from the chair, and sat by her boy on the carpet, smoothing his face with tobacco-stained fingers, and languishing, while her thick, over-ripe lips took his kisses as a baby bird takes food from its mother.
With a final strum of chords, the pianist got up from the chair and sat next to her boy on the carpet, gently smoothing his face with her tobacco-stained fingers, feeling relaxed, while her thick, overripe lips received his kisses like a baby bird accepting food from its mother.
We talked—all of us—in jerks and snatches. Then the oil in the lamp began to give out, and the room grew dim. Some one said: "Play something!" And some one said: "Too tired!" The girl reclining on the bed grew snappy. She did not lean for caresses. She seemed morose, preoccupied, almost impatient. Twice she snapped up her boy on a casual remark. I believe I talked vodka'd nonsense....
We all chatted in short bursts. Then the oil in the lamp started to run low, and the room got dimmer. Someone said, "Play something!" And someone else replied, "I'm too tired!" The girl lying on the bed became irritable. She didn't reach out for affection. She seemed gloomy, lost in thought, and a bit impatient. Twice she snapped at her boyfriend over casual comments. I think I was talking nonsense after drinking vodka...
But suddenly there came a whisper of soft feet on the landing, and a secret tap at the door. Some one opened it, and slipped out. One heard the lazy hum of voices in busy conversation. Then silence; and some one entered the room and shut the door. One of the boys asked, casually, "What's up?" His question was not answered, but the girl who had gone to the door snapped something in a sharp tone which might have been either Russian or Yiddish. Katarina loosened herself from me, and sat up. The girl on the bed sat up. The three of them spat angry phrases about, I called over to one of the boys: "What's the joke? Anything wrong?" and received a reply: "Owshdiknow? I ain't a ruddy Russian, am I?"
But suddenly there was the sound of soft footsteps in the hallway, followed by a quiet knock at the door. Someone opened it and slipped outside. You could hear the lazy buzz of voices in conversation. Then silence, and someone walked into the room and closed the door. One of the boys casually asked, "What's going on?" His question went unanswered, but the girl who had gone to the door snapped something in a sharp tone that might have been Russian or Yiddish. Katarina pulled away from me and sat up. The girl on the bed also sat up. The three of them exchanged angry remarks, so I called over to one of the boys, "What's the joke? Is something wrong?" and got the reply, "How should I know? I’m not a damn Russian, am I?"
Katarina suddenly drew back her flaming face. "Here," she said, "you better go."
Katarina suddenly pulled back her flushed face. "Here," she said, "you should go."
"Go?"
"Let's go?"
"Yes—fathead! Go's what I said."
"Yes—idiot! That's what I said."
"But—" I began, looking and feeling like a flabbergasted cat.
"But—" I started, looking and feeling like a stunned cat.
"Don't I speak plain? Go!"
"Don't I speak clearly? Go!"
I suppose a man never feels a finer idiot than when a woman tells him she doesn't want him. If he ever does, it is when a woman tells him that she loves him. Katarina had given me the bullet, and, of course, I felt a fool; but I derived some consolation from the fact that the other boys were being told off. Clearly, big things were in the air, about to happen. Something, evidently, had already happened. I wondered.... Then I sat down on the sofa, and flatly told Katarina that I was not going unless I had a reason.
I guess a guy never feels more of a fool than when a woman says she doesn’t want him. If he does, it’s probably when a woman tells him she loves him. Katarina had given me the brush-off, and of course, I felt stupid; but I took some comfort in the fact that the other guys were getting turned down too. Clearly, something big was about to happen. Something had already happened, obviously. I wondered.... Then I sat down on the couch and told Katarina straight up that I wasn’t leaving unless I had a good reason.
"Oh," she said, blithely, "ain't you? This is my room, ain't it? I brought you here, and you stay here just as long as I choose, and no longer. Who d'you think you are, saying you won't go? This is my room. I let you come here for a drink, and you just got to go when I say. See?"
"Oh," she said cheerfully, "you don't think so, do you? This is my room, right? I brought you here, and you can stay as long as I decide, not a minute longer. Who do you think you are, saying you won’t leave? This is my room. I let you come in for a drink, and you have to go when I say so. Got it?"
I was about to make a second stand, when again there came a stealthy tap at the door, and the whispering of slippered feet. Sanya glided to the door, opened it, and disappeared. In a moment she came back, and called, "'Rina!" Katarina slipped from my embrace, went to the door, and disappeared too. One girl and three boys remained—in silence.
I was about to make a second stand when there was another quiet tap at the door and the sound of soft footsteps. Sanya glided over to the door, opened it, and vanished. Moments later, she returned and called, "'Rina!" Katarina slipped out of my embrace, went to the door, and disappeared as well. Now, one girl and three boys were left—in silence.
Next moment Katarina reappeared, and said something to Sanya. Sanya pulled her boy by the arm, and went out. The other girl pushed her boy at the neck and literally threw him out. Katarina came over to me, and said: "Go, little fool!"
Next moment, Katarina came back and said something to Sanya. Sanya grabbed her boy by the arm and walked out. The other girl shoved her boy by the neck and practically tossed him outside. Katarina came over to me and said, "Go, you little fool!"
I said: "Shan't unless I know what the game is."
I said, "I won't unless I know what the game is."
She stood over me; glared; searched for words to meet the occasion; found none. She gestured. I sat as rigid as an immobile comedian. Finally, she flung her arms, and swept away. At the door she turned; "Blasted little fool! He'll do us both in if y'ain't careful. You don't know him. Both of us he'll have. Serveyeh right."
She stood over me, glaring, trying to find the right words for the moment but couldn’t. She made a gesture. I sat there as stiff as a statue. Finally, she threw her arms up and stormed out. At the door, she turned back and said, "What a little idiot! He’ll ruin us both if you’re not careful. You don’t know him. He’ll take both of us down. Serves you right."
She disappeared. I was alone. I heard the sup-sup of her slippered feet down the stair.
She vanished. I was by myself. I heard the sup-sup of her slippered feet on the stairs.
I got up, and moved to the door. I heard nothing. I stood by the window, my thoughts dancing a ragtime. I wondered what to do, and how, and whether. I wondered what was up exactly. I wondered ... well, I just wondered. My thoughts got into a tangle, sank, and swam, and sank again. Then there was a sudden struggle and spurt from the lamp, and it went black out. From a room across the landing a clock ticked menacingly. I saw, by the thin light from the window, the smoke of a discarded cigarette curling up and up to the ceiling like a snake.
I got up and walked to the door. I didn't hear anything. I stood by the window, my mind racing. I was unsure of what to do, how to do it, and if I should even do anything at all. I wondered what was really going on. I just… wondered. My thoughts got tangled, floated, and then sank again. Suddenly, there was a struggle and a flash from the lamp, and then it went dark. From a room across the hall, a clock ticked ominously. I noticed, in the dim light from the window, the smoke from a discarded cigarette rising to the ceiling like a snake.
I went again to the door, peered down the steep stair and over the crazy balustrade. Nobody was about; no voices. I slipped swiftly down the five flights, met nobody. I stood in the slobbered vestibule. From afar I heard the sluck of the waters against the staples of the wharves, and the wicked hoot of the tugs.
I went back to the door, looked down the steep stairs and over the weird railing. Nobody was around; no voices were heard. I quickly went down the five flights without running into anyone. I stood in the messy entrance. In the distance, I could hear the sound of the water against the posts of the docks and the loud honking of the tugboats.
It was then that a sudden nameless fear seized me; it was that simple terror that comes from nothing but ourselves. I am not usually afraid of any man or thing. I am normally nervous, and there are three or four things that have power to terrify me. But I am not, I think, afraid. At that moment, however, I was afraid of everything: of the room I had left, of the house, of the people, of the inviting lights of the warehouses and the threatening shoals of the alleys.
It was then that a sudden, indescribable fear overwhelmed me; it was that simple terror that arises from within ourselves. I'm usually not afraid of anyone or anything. I tend to be anxious, and there are three or four things that can truly scare me. But I don’t think I'm actually afraid. In that moment, however, I was scared of everything: of the room I had just left, of the house, of the people, of the welcoming lights of the warehouses, and of the menacing shadows in the alleys.
A WORD FOR AUTUMN
By A. A. Milne
This is the sort of urbane pleasantry in which British essayists are prolific and graceful. Alan Alexander Milne was born in 1882, went to Trinity College, Cambridge; was editor of The Granta (the leading undergraduate publication at Cambridge at that time); and plunged into the great whirlpool of London journalism. He was on the staff of Punch, 1906-14. He has now collected several volumes of charming essays, and has had considerable success as a playwright: his comedy, Mr. Pim Passes By, recently played a prosperous run in New York. "A Word for Autumn" is from his volume Not That It Matters.
This is the kind of sophisticated charm that British essayists are both skilled and elegant at. Alan Alexander Milne was born in 1882 and attended Trinity College, Cambridge. He served as the editor of The Granta (the main undergraduate publication at Cambridge during that period) and then dove into the vibrant world of London journalism. He was part of the staff at Punch from 1906 to 1914. He has now gathered several collections of delightful essays and has achieved notable success as a playwright: his comedy, Mr. Pim Passes By, recently enjoyed a successful run in New York. "A Word for Autumn" is from his collection Not That It Matters.
LAST night the waiter put the celery on with the cheese, and I knew that summer was indeed dead. Other signs of autumn there may be—the reddening leaf, the chill in the early-morning air, the misty evenings—but none of these comes home to me so truly. There may be cool mornings in July; in a year of drought the leaves may change before their time; it is only with the first celery that summer is over.
LAST night the waiter served the celery with the cheese, and I realized that summer was really over. There might be other signs of autumn—the leaves turning red, the chill in the early morning air, the foggy evenings—but none of these resonates with me as deeply. There can be cool mornings in July; during a drought, the leaves might change prematurely; it’s only with the first celery that I know summer has ended.
I knew all along that it would not last. Even in April I was saying that winter would soon be here. Yet somehow it had begun to seem possible lately that a miracle might happen, that summer might drift on and on through the months—a final upheaval to crown a wonderful year. The celery settled that. Last night with the celery autumn came into its own.
I knew from the start that it wouldn't last. Even back in April, I was saying that winter would be here soon. Yet somehow, lately, it started to feel like a miracle could happen, that summer could stretch on through the months—a final celebration to top off a great year. The celery changed that. Last night, with the celery, autumn arrived in full swing.
There is a crispness about celery that is of the essence of October. It is as fresh and clean as a rainy day after a spell of heat. It crackles pleasantly in the mouth. Moreover it is excellent, I am told, for the complexion. One is always hearing of things which are good for the complexion, but there is no doubt that celery stands high on the list. After the burns and freckles of summer one is in need of something. How good that celery should be there at one's elbow.
There’s a freshness to celery that captures the spirit of October. It’s as clean and refreshing as a rainy day after a hot spell. It has a nice crunch when you bite into it. Plus, I’ve heard it’s great for your skin. People are always talking about things that are good for your complexion, but celery definitely ranks high on that list. After dealing with summer’s sunburns and freckles, you need something like this. It’s great that celery is right there when you need it.
A week ago—("A little more cheese, waiter")—a week ago I grieved for the dying summer. I wondered how I could possibly bear the waiting—the eight long months till May. In vain to comfort myself with the thought that I could get through more work in the winter undistracted by thoughts of cricket grounds and country houses. In vain, equally, to tell myself that I could stay in bed later in the mornings. Even the thought of after-breakfast pipes in front of the fire left me cold. But now, suddenly, I am reconciled to autumn. I see quite clearly that all good things must come to an end. The summer has been splendid, but it has lasted long enough. This morning I welcomed the chill in the air; this morning I viewed the falling leaves with cheerfulness; and this morning I said to myself, "Why, of course, I'll have celery for lunch." ("More bread, waiter.")
A week ago—("A little more cheese, waiter")—a week ago I was mourning the end of summer. I kept thinking about how I would endure the wait—the eight long months until May. It was pointless to comfort myself with the idea that I could get more work done in the winter without being distracted by cricket fields and countryside homes. Equally pointless was telling myself I'd be able to sleep in later in the mornings. Even the thought of enjoying pipes after breakfast by the fire left me unenthused. But now, suddenly, I’ve accepted autumn. I realize clearly that all good things must come to an end. The summer was fantastic, but it’s lasted long enough. This morning I welcomed the crispness in the air; this morning I looked at the falling leaves with a sense of cheer; and this morning I told myself, "Of course, I’ll have celery for lunch." ("More bread, waiter.")
"Season of mists and mellow fruitfulness," said Keats, not actually picking out celery in so many words, but plainly including it in the general blessings of the autumn. Yet what an opportunity he missed by not concentrating on that precious root. Apples, grapes, nuts, and vegetable marrows he mentions specially—and how poor a selection! For apples and grapes are not typical of any month, so ubiquitous are they, vegetable marrows are vegetables pour rire and have no place in any serious consideration of the seasons, while as for nuts, have we not a national song which asserts distinctly, "Here we go gathering nuts in May"? Season of mists and mellow celery, then let it be. A pat of butter underneath the bough, a wedge of cheese, a loaf of bread and—Thou.
"Season of mist and mellow fruitfulness," said Keats, not really calling out celery in so many words, but clearly including it in the blessings of autumn. Yet what an opportunity he missed by not focusing on that precious root. He specifically mentions apples, grapes, nuts, and vegetable marrows—and what a weak selection it is! Apples and grapes aren't really representative of any month, as they're so common, vegetable marrows are just vegetables for laughs and don’t fit into any serious discussion of the seasons, and as for nuts, don’t we have a national song that clearly states, "Here we go gathering nuts in May"? So, let it be the season of mist and mellow celery. A pat of butter under the tree, a wedge of cheese, a loaf of bread—and you.
How delicate are the tender shoots unfolded layer by layer. Of what a whiteness is the last baby one of all, of what a sweetness his flavor. It is well that this should be the last rite of the meal—finis coronat opus—so that we may go straight on to the business of the pipe. Celery demands a pipe rather than a cigar, and it can be eaten better in an inn or a London tavern than in the home. Yes, and it should be eaten alone, for it is the only food which one really wants to hear oneself eat. Besides, in company one may have to consider the wants of others. Celery is not a thing to share with any man. Alone in your country inn you may call for the celery; but if you are wise you will see that no other traveler wanders into the room. Take warning from one who has learnt a lesson. One day I lunched alone at an inn, finishing with cheese and celery. Another traveler came in and lunched too. We did not speak—I was busy with my celery. From the other end of the table he reached across for the cheese. That was all right! it was the public cheese. But he also reached across for the celery—my private celery for which I owed. Foolishly—you know how one does—I had left the sweetest and crispest shoots till the last, tantalizing myself pleasantly with the thought of them. Horror! to see them snatched from me by a stranger. He realized later what he had done and apologized, but of what good is an apology in such circumstances? Yet at least the tragedy was not without its value. Now one remembers to lock the door.
How delicate are the tender shoots, unfolding layer by layer. What a whiteness the last little one has, and what a sweetness in its flavor. It's fitting that this should be the final course of the meal—finis coronat opus—so we can move right on to enjoying a pipe. Celery calls for a pipe rather than a cigar, and it's best enjoyed in an inn or a London tavern rather than at home. Yes, it’s a food meant to be savored alone, because it’s the only thing you really want to hear yourself crunching. Plus, when you're with others, you have to consider their wants. Celery isn’t something to share with anyone. Alone in your country inn, you might order celery; but if you’re smart, you’ll make sure no other traveler steps into the room. Take it from someone who learned this the hard way. One day I had lunch alone at an inn, finishing with cheese and celery. Another traveler came in and had lunch too. We didn’t talk—I was focused on my celery. From the other end of the table, he reached across for the cheese. That was fine—it was public cheese. But then he reached for the celery—my private celery that I was looking forward to. Foolishly—you know how it is—I had saved the sweetest and crunchiest pieces for last, teasing myself with the thought of them. Horror! Watching them get snatched away by a stranger. He realized his mistake later and apologized, but what good is an apology in that situation? At least the experience wasn’t completely without its lesson. Now I remember to lock the door.
Yes, I can face the winter with calm. I suppose I had forgotten what it was really like. I had been thinking of the winter as a horrid wet, dreary time fit only for professional football. Now I can see other things—crisp and sparkling days, long pleasant evenings, cheery fires. Good work shall be done this winter. Life shall be lived well. The end of the summer is not the end of the world. Here's to October—and, waiter, some more celery.
Yes, I can face the winter with ease. I guess I had forgotten what it was really like. I’d been thinking of winter as a miserable, wet, dreary season meant only for professional football. Now I can see more—crisp and bright days, long enjoyable evenings, cozy fires. Good work will be done this winter. Life will be lived well. The end of summer is not the end of the world. Here’s to October—and, waiter, some more celery.
"A CLERGYMAN"
By Max Beerbohm
Max Beerbohm, I dare say (and I believe it has been said before), is the most subtly gifted English essayist since Charles Lamb. It is not surprising that he has (now for many years) been referred to as "the incomparable Max," for what other contemporary has never once missed fire, never failed to achieve perfection in the field of his choice? Whether in caricature, short story, fable, parody, or essay, he has always been consummate in grace, tact, insouciant airy precision. I hope you will not miss "No. 2 The Pines" (in And Even Now, from which this selection also comes), a reminiscence of his first visit to Swinburne in 1899. That beautiful (there is no other word) essay shows an even ampler range of Mr. Beerbohm's powers: a tenderness and lovely grace that remind one, almost against belief, that the gay youth of the '90's now mellows deliciously with the end of the fifth decade. He was so enormously old in 1896, when he published his first book and called it his Works; he seems much younger now: he is having his first childhood.
Max Beerbohm, I’d say (and I think it’s been said before), is the most subtly talented English essayist since Charles Lamb. It's no surprise that he has been called "the incomparable Max" for many years, because what other contemporary writer has never missed the mark or failed to achieve perfection in their field? Whether through caricature, short story, fable, parody, or essay, he consistently displays exceptional grace, tact, and effortless precision. I hope you won’t overlook "No. 2 The Pines" (in And Even Now, from which this selection also comes), a memory of his first visit to Swinburne in 1899. That beautiful (there’s no better word) essay showcases an even broader range of Mr. Beerbohm’s talents: a tenderness and lovely grace that almost make one believe that the lively youth of the '90s has wonderfully matured with the passage of time. He seemed so incredibly old in 1896 when he published his first book and named it his Works; he seems much younger now: he is experiencing his first childhood.
This portrait of the unfortunate cleric annihilated by Dr. Johnson is a triumphant example of the skill with which a perfect artist can manœuver a trifle, carved like an ivory trinket; in such hands, subtlety never becomes mere tenuity.
This portrayal of the unfortunate cleric destroyed by Dr. Johnson is a brilliant example of how a true artist can skillfully handle something trivial, shaped like an ivory ornament; in such hands, subtlety never turns into mere weakness.
Max Beerbohm was born in London in 1872; studied at Charterhouse School and Merton College, Oxford; and was a brilliant figure in the Savoy and Yellow Book circles by the time he was twenty-four. His genius is that of the essay in its purest distillation: a clear cross-section of life as seen through the lens of self; the pure culture (in the biological sense) of observing personality.
Max Beerbohm was born in London in 1872; he studied at Charterhouse School and Merton College, Oxford, and by the time he was twenty-four, he was a prominent figure in the Savoy and Yellow Book circles. His genius lies in the essay in its most refined form: a clear snapshot of life viewed through the lens of the self; the essence (in the biological sense) of observing personality.
I have often wondered how it came about (though the matter is wholly nonpertinent) that Mr. Beerbohm married an American lady—quite a habit with English essayists, by the way: Hilaire Belloc and Bertrand Russell did likewise. Who's Who says she was from Memphis, which adds lustre to that admirable city.
I have often wondered how it happened (though it's really not important) that Mr. Beerbohm married an American woman—something English essayists tend to do: Hilaire Belloc and Bertrand Russell did the same. Who's Who states she was from Memphis, which adds prestige to that great city.
He now lives in Italy.
He now lives in Italy.
FRAGMENTARY, pale, momentary; almost nothing; glimpsed and gone; as it were, a faint human hand thrust up, never to reappear, from beneath the rolling waters of Time, he forever haunts my memory and solicits my weak imagination. Nothing is told of him but that once, abruptly, he asked a question, and received an answer.
FRAGMENTARY, pale, momentary; almost nothing; seen for a moment and then gone; it’s like a faint human hand reaching up, never to come back, from beneath the rolling waters of Time. He haunts my memory and stirs my imagination. The only thing known about him is that once, out of the blue, he asked a question and got an answer.
This was on the afternoon of April 7th, 1778, at Streatham, in the well-appointed house of Mr. Thrale. Johnson, on the morning of that day, had entertained Boswell at breakfast in Bolt Court, and invited him to dine at Thrale Hall. The two took coach and arrived early. It seems that Sir John Pringle had asked Boswell to ask Johnson "what were the best English sermons for style." In the interval before dinner, accordingly, Boswell reeled off the names of several divines whose prose might or might not win commendation. "Atterbury?" he suggested. "Johnson: Yes, Sir, one of the best. Boswell: Tillotson? Johnson: Why, not now. I should not advise any one to imitate Tillotson's style; though I don't know; I should be cautious of censuring anything that has been applauded by so many suffrages.—South is one of the best, if you except his peculiarities, and his violence, and sometimes coarseness of language.—Seed has a very fine style; but he is not very theological. Jortin's sermons are very elegant. Sherlock's style, too, is very elegant, though he has not made it his principal study.—And you may add Smalridge. Boswell: I like Ogden's Sermons on Prayer very much, both for neatness of style and subtility of reasoning. Johnson: I should like to read all that Ogden has written. Boswell: What I want to know is, what sermons afford the best specimen of English pulpit eloquence. Johnson: We have no sermons addressed to the passions, that are good for anything; if you mean that kind of eloquence. A Clergyman, whose name I do not recollect: Were not Dodd's sermons addressed to the passions? Johnson: They were nothing, Sir, be they addressed to what they may."
This was on the afternoon of April 7th, 1778, at Streatham, in the nicely furnished house of Mr. Thrale. Johnson had treated Boswell to breakfast that morning in Bolt Court and invited him to dinner at Thrale Hall. They took a coach and arrived early. It seems that Sir John Pringle had asked Boswell to find out from Johnson "what the best English sermons are for style." So, during the time before dinner, Boswell listed several preachers whose writing might or might not receive praise. "Atterbury?" he suggested. "Johnson: Yes, Sir, one of the best. Boswell: Tillotson? Johnson: Well, not now. I wouldn't advise anyone to try to copy Tillotson's style; though I don’t know; I’d be careful about criticizing anything that has been praised by so many people.—South is one of the best, if you overlook his peculiarities, his intensity, and sometimes rough language.—Seed has a very nice style; but he isn’t very theological. Jortin's sermons are very elegant. Sherlock’s style is also quite elegant, even though it hasn’t been his main focus.—And you can add Smalridge. Boswell: I like Ogden's Sermons on Prayer a lot, both for their neatness and their subtle reasoning. Johnson: I’d like to read everything Ogden has written. Boswell: What I want to know is, which sermons provide the best examples of English pulpit eloquence. Johnson We don’t have any sermons aimed at the emotions that are worth anything, if that’s the kind of eloquence you mean. A Pastor, whose name I can’t recall: Were Dodd's sermons not aimed at the emotions? Johnson: They were nothing, Sir, regardless of what they were aimed at."
The suddenness of it! Bang!—and the rabbit that had popped from its burrow was no more.
The suddenness of it! Bang!—and the rabbit that had jumped out of its burrow was gone.
I know not which is the more startling—the début of the unfortunate clergyman, or the instantaneousness of his end. Why hadn't Boswell told us there was a clergyman present? Well, we may be sure that so careful and acute an artist had some good reason. And I suppose the clergyman was left to take us unawares because just so did he take the company. Had we been told he was there, we might have expected that sooner or later he would join in the conversation. He would have had a place in our minds. We may assume that in the minds of the company around Johnson he had no place. He sat forgotten, overlooked; so that his self-assertion startled every one just as on Boswell's page it startles us. In Johnson's massive and magnetic presence only some very remarkable man, such as Mr. Burke, was sharply distinguishable from the rest. Others might, if they had something in them, stand out slightly. This unfortunate clergyman may have had something in him, but I judge that he lacked the gift of seeming as if he had. That deficiency, however, does not account for the horrid fate that befell him. One of Johnson's strongest and most inveterate feelings was his veneration for the Cloth. To any one in Holy Orders he habitually listened with a grace and charming deference. To-day, moreover, he was in excellent good humor. He was at the Thrales', where he so loved to be; the day was fine; a fine dinner was in close prospect; and he had had what he always declared to be the sum of human felicity—a ride in a coach. Nor was there in the question put by the clergyman anything likely to enrage him. Dodd was one whom Johnson had befriended in adversity; and it had always been agreed that Dodd in his pulpit was very emotional. What drew the blasting flash must have been not the question itself, but the manner in which it was asked. And I think we can guess what that manner was.
I don't know which is more surprising—the unexpected arrival of the unfortunate clergyman or the instant way he met his end. Why didn't Boswell mention there was a clergyman present? Well, we can be sure that such a careful and insightful writer had a good reason for it. I suppose the clergyman was left to catch everyone off guard, just as he caught the crowd by surprise. If we had known he was there, we might have expected him to join in the conversation sooner or later. He would have registered in our minds. It seems that in the minds of those gathered around Johnson, he had no presence. He sat forgotten and overlooked, so his sudden attempt to assert himself surprised everyone, just as it surprises us on Boswell's page. In Johnson's strong and captivating presence, only someone very remarkable, like Mr. Burke, stood out distinctly from the rest. Others might, if they had anything to offer, stand out a little. This unfortunate clergyman may have had something about him, but I think he lacked the ability to appear as though he did. However, that flaw doesn’t explain the terrible fate that came to him. One of Johnson's strongest and most enduring beliefs was his respect for the clergy. He usually listened to anyone in Holy Orders with grace and charming deference. Today, moreover, he was in a great mood. He was at the Thrales', where he loved to be; the weather was nice; a delicious dinner was on the way; and he had just enjoyed what he always called the pinnacle of human happiness—a ride in a coach. Also, the question posed by the clergyman was unlikely to provoke him. Dodd was someone Johnson had helped during tough times; it had always been understood that Dodd was very emotional in his pulpit. What must have triggered the explosive response was not the question itself, but the way it was asked. And I think we can guess what that manner was.
You may, from sheer perversity, utter them in a rich and sonorous baritone or bass. But if you do so, they sound utterly unnatural. To make them carry the conviction of human utterance, you have no choice: you must pipe them.
You might, just for the fun of it, say them in a deep, resonant baritone or bass voice. But if you do, they will sound completely unnatural. To make them feel convincing and human, you have no choice: you have to use a lighter tone.
Remember, now, Johnson was very deaf. Even the people whom he knew well, the people to whose voices he was accustomed, had to address him very loudly. It is probable that this unregarded, young, shy clergyman, when at length he suddenly mustered courage to 'cut in,' let his high, thin voice soar too high, insomuch that it was a kind of scream. On no other hypothesis can we account for the ferocity with which Johnson turned and rended him. Johnson didn't, we may be sure, mean to be cruel. The old lion, startled, just struck out blindly. But the force of paw and claws was not the less lethal. We have endless testimony to the strength of Johnson's voice; and the very cadence of those words, "They were nothing, Sir, be they addressed to what they may," convinces me that the old lion's jaws never gave forth a louder roar. Boswell does not record that there was any further conversation before the announcement of dinner. Perhaps the whole company had been temporarily deafened. But I am not bothering about them. My heart goes out to the poor dear clergyman exclusively.
Remember, Johnson was very deaf. Even people he knew well, those whose voices he was used to, had to speak to him quite loudly. It’s likely that this overlooked, young, shy clergyman, when he finally found the courage to interject, let his high, thin voice go a bit too high, almost like a scream. That's the only way we can explain the fierce way Johnson reacted to him. Johnson certainly didn't mean to be cruel. The old lion, taken by surprise, just struck out without thinking. But the power of his blow was still deadly. There’s plenty of evidence of the strength of Johnson's voice, and the very rhythm of those words, "They were nothing, Sir, be they addressed to what they may," convinces me that the old lion's jaws never produced a louder roar. Boswell doesn’t mention any further conversation before dinner was announced. Maybe the whole group was temporarily stunned. But I'm not concerned about them. My heart goes out to the poor dear clergyman only.
I said a moment ago that he was young and shy; and I admit that I slipped those epithets in without having justified them to you by due process of induction. Your quick mind will have already supplied what I omitted. A man with a high, thin voice, and without power to impress any one with a sense of his importance, a man so null in effect that even the retentive mind of Boswell did not retain his very name, would assuredly not be a self-confident man. Even if he were not naturally shy, social courage would soon have been sapped in him, and would in time have been destroyed, by experience. That he had not yet given himself up as a bad job, that he still had faint wild hopes, is proved by the fact that he did snatch the opportunity for asking that question. He must, accordingly, have been young. Was he the curate of the neighboring church? I think so. It would account for his having been invited. I see him as he sits there listening to the great Doctor's pronouncement on Atterbury and those others. He sits on the edge of a chair in the background. He has colorless eyes, fixed earnestly, and a face almost as pale as the clerical bands beneath his somewhat receding chin. His forehead is high and narrow, his hair mouse-colored. His hands are clasped tight before him, the knuckles standing out sharply. This constriction does not mean that he is steeling himself to speak. He has no positive intention of speaking. Very much, nevertheless, is he wishing in the back of his mind that he could say something—something whereat the great Doctor would turn on him and say, after a pause for thought, "Why, yes, Sir. That is most justly observed" or "Sir, this has never occurred to me. I thank you"—thereby fixing the observer forever high in the esteem of all. And now in a flash the chance presents itself. "We have," shouts Johnson, "no sermons addressed to the passions, that are good for anything." I see the curate's frame quiver with sudden impulse, and his mouth fly open, and—no, I can't bear it, I shut my eyes and ears. But audible, even so, is something shrill, followed by something thunderous.
I mentioned earlier that he was young and shy, and I recognize that I included those descriptions without adequately supporting them. Your sharp mind has already filled in what I left out. A man with a high, thin voice who has no way of making anyone feel his importance, a man so unremarkable that even Boswell's memory couldn't capture his name, wouldn't likely be self-assured. Even if he wasn't naturally shy, his social confidence would have been quickly drained and eventually destroyed by experience. The fact that he hadn't completely given up, that he still held onto faint hopes, is evident because he did seize the chance to ask that question. So, he must have been young. Was he the curate of the nearby church? I believe so, which would explain why he was invited. I picture him sitting there, listening to the great Doctor discuss Atterbury and the others. He sits on the edge of a chair in the background. He has colorless eyes that are fixed with earnest intent, and a face almost as pale as the clerical bands under his slightly receding chin. His forehead is high and narrow, and his hair is mouse-colored. His hands are clasped tightly in front of him, the knuckles sticking out sharply. This tension doesn’t mean he’s getting ready to speak; he has no real intention of doing so. Still, he desperately wishes he could say something that would prompt the great Doctor to turn to him and say, after a moment's thought, "Why, yes, Sir. That is very well observed," or "Sir, I've never thought of that. Thank you," thereby earning the observer lasting respect. And then, in an instant, the opportunity arises. "We have," Johnson exclaims, "no sermons directed at the passions that are worth anything." I see the curate's body tremble with sudden energy, and his mouth opens wide, and—no, I can't stand it; I close my eyes and cover my ears. But I can still hear something shrill, followed by something loud.
Presently I reopen my eyes. The crimson has not yet faded from that young face yonder, and slowly down either cheek falls a glistening tear. Shades of Atterbury and Tillotson! Such weakness shames the Established Church. What would Jortin and Smalridge have said?—what Seed and South? And, by the way, who were they, these worthies? It is a solemn thought that so little is conveyed to us by names which to the palæo-Georgians conveyed so much. We discern a dim, composite picture of a big man in a big wig and a billowing black gown, with a big congregation beneath him. But we are not anxious to hear what he is saying. We know it is all very elegant. We know it will be printed and be bound in finely-tooled full calf, and no palæo-Georgian gentleman's library will be complete without it. Literate people in those days were comparatively few; but, bating that, one may say that sermons were as much in request as novels are to-day. I wonder, will mankind continue to be capricious? It is a very solemn thought indeed that no more than a hundred-and-fifty years hence the novelists of our time, with all their moral and political and sociological outlook and influence, will perhaps shine as indistinctly as do those old preachers, with all their elegance, now. "Yes, Sir," some great pundit may be telling a disciple at this moment, "Wells is one of the best. Galsworthy is one of the best, if you except his concern for delicacy of style. Mrs. Ward has a very firm grasp of problems, but is not very creational.—Caine's books are very edifying. I should like to read all that Caine has written. Miss Corelli, too, is very edifying.—And you may add Upton Sinclair." "What I want to know," says the disciple, "is, what English novels may be selected as specially enthralling." The pundit answers: "We have no novels addressed to the passions that are good for anything, if you mean that kind of enthralment." And here some poor wretch (whose name the disciple will not remember) inquires: "Are not Mrs. Glyn's novels addressed to the passions?" and is in due form annihilated. Can it be that a time will come when readers of this passage in our pundit's Life will take more interest in the poor nameless wretch than in all the bearers of those great names put together, being no more able or anxious to discriminate between (say) Mrs. Ward and Mr. Sinclair than we are to set Ogden above Sherlock, or Sherlock above Ogden? It seems impossible. But we must remember that things are not always what they seem.
Right now, I’m reopening my eyes. The redness hasn’t faded from that young face over there, and slowly a glistening tear rolls down each cheek. Shades of Atterbury and Tillotson! Such weakness is embarrassing for the Established Church. What would Jortin and Smalridge have said?—what about Seed and South? And, by the way, who were they, these notable figures? It’s a serious thought that so little is understood by names which meant so much to the paleo-Georgians. We see a vague, composite image of a big man in a big wig and a flowing black gown, with a large congregation below him. But we’re not eager to hear what he’s saying. We know it’s all very elegant. We know it will be printed and bound in richly designed leather, and no paleo-Georgian gentleman’s library would be complete without it. Literate people back then were relatively few; but aside from that, it can be said that sermons were as popular as novels are today. I wonder, will humanity always be so unpredictable? It’s a very serious thought that in just a hundred and fifty years, the novelists of our time, with all their moral, political, and sociological insights, might shine as faintly as those old preachers do now, despite all their elegance. “Yes, Sir,” some great scholar might be telling a student right now, “Wells is one of the best. Galsworthy is also one of the best, except for his concern for style. Mrs. Ward has a strong grip on issues, but isn’t very creative. Caine’s books are quite enlightening. I’d like to read everything Caine has written. Miss Corelli is enlightening too.—And you can add Upton Sinclair.” “What I want to know,” says the student, “is which English novels are particularly captivating.” The scholar replies: “We don’t have any novels that are really good for passions if that’s the kind of captivating you mean.” And here, some poor soul (whose name the student won’t remember) asks, “Aren’t Mrs. Glyn’s novels about
Every man illustrious in his day, however much he may be gratified by his fame, looks with an eager eye to posterity for a continuance of past favors, and would even live the remainder of his life in obscurity if by so doing he could insure that future generations would preserve a correct attitude towards him forever. This is very natural and human, but, like so many very natural and human things, very silly. Tillotson and the rest need not, after all, be pitied for our neglect of them. They either know nothing about it, or are above such terrene trifles. Let us keep our pity for the seething mass of divines who were not elegantly verbose, and had no fun or glory while they lasted. And let us keep a specially large portion for one whose lot was so much worse than merely undistinguished. If that nameless curate had not been at the Thrales' that day, or, being there, had kept the silence that so well became him, his life would have been drab enough, in all conscience. But at any rate an unpromising career would not have been nipped in the bud. And that is what in fact happened, I'm sure of it. A robust man might have rallied under the blow. Not so our friend. Those who knew him in infancy had not expected that he would be reared. Better for him had they been right. It is well to grow up and be ordained, but not if you are delicate and very sensitive, and shall happen to annoy the greatest, the most stentorian and roughest of contemporary personages. "A Clergyman" never held up his head or smiled again after the brief encounter recorded for us by Boswell. He sank into a rapid decline. Before the next blossoming of Thrale Hall's almond trees he was no more. I like to think that he died forgiving Dr. Johnson.
Every man famous in his time, no matter how much he enjoys his fame, looks eagerly to the future for a continuation of past recognition. He would even prefer to live the rest of his life in obscurity if it meant ensuring that future generations would remember him positively. This is entirely natural and human, but like many natural human things, it's pretty foolish. Tillotson and the others shouldn't be pitied for being overlooked by us. They either don’t know about it or are above such earthly concerns. Let’s reserve our sympathy for the mass of clergymen who weren’t skillfully eloquent and had no joy or glory during their lifetimes. And we should save a particularly large portion of our sympathy for one whose situation was much worse than simply being unnoticed. If that nameless curate hadn't been at the Thrales’ that day, or had chosen to keep the silence that suited him so well, his life would have been quite dull, honestly. But at least, an unpromising future would not have been cut short. And that’s exactly what happened, I'm sure of it. A strong man might have bounced back after the blow. Not so with our friend. Those who knew him as a child hadn’t expected him to grow up at all. It would have been better for him if they had been right. It’s good to grow up and become ordained, but not if you're fragile and very sensitive, and you end up upsetting the most powerful, loudest, and roughest people of your time. "A Clergyman" never held his head high or smiled again after that brief encounter recorded for us by Boswell. He quickly fell into a deep decline. Before the next blooming of the almond trees at Thrale Hall, he was gone. I like to think that he died having forgiven Dr. Johnson.
SAMUEL BUTLER: DIOGENES OF THE VICTORIANS
By Stuart P. Sherman
Professor Sherman's cold compress, applied to the Butler cult, caused much suffering in some regions, where it was said to be more than a cooling bandage—in fact, a wet blanket. In the general rough-and-tumble among critical standards during recent years, Mr. Sherman is one of those who have dealt some swinging blows in favor of the Victorians and the literary Old Guard—which was often square but rarely hollow.
Professor Sherman's cold compress, used on the Butler cult, caused a lot of distress in certain areas, where it was considered to be more than just a cooling bandage—in fact, a suffocating weight. In the general chaos surrounding critical standards in recent years, Mr. Sherman is one of those who have delivered strong arguments in favor of the Victorians and the literary Old Guard—which was often conventional but rarely empty.
Stuart Pratt Sherman, born in Iowa in 1881, graduated from Williams in 1903, has been since 1911 professor of English at the University of Illinois. His own account of his adventures, written without intended publication, is worth consideration. He says:
Stuart Pratt Sherman, born in Iowa in 1881, graduated from Williams in 1903, and has been a professor of English at the University of Illinois since 1911. His own account of his adventures, written without the intention of being published, is worth considering. He says:
"My life hasn't been quite as dryly 'academic,' nor as simply 'middle-Western,' as the record indicates. For example: I lived in Los Angeles from my 5th to my 13th year, and then went on a seven months' adventure in gold mining in the Black Cañon of Arizona, where I had some experience with drouth in the desert, etc. That is not 'literary.'
"My life hasn't been as strictly 'academic,' nor as straightforwardly 'Midwestern,' as it seems. For instance, I lived in Los Angeles from age 5 to 13, and then I spent seven months on a gold mining adventure in the Black Canyon of Arizona, where I dealt with drought in the desert, among other things. That's not 'literary.'"
"Recently, I've been thinking I might write a little paper about some college friends at Williams. I was in college with Harry James Smith (author of Mrs. Bumpstead Lee), Max Eastman, and 'Go-to-Hell' Whittlesey. As editor of the Williams Monthly I have accepted and rejected manuscripts of both the two latter, and have reminiscences of their literary youth.
"Recently, I've been considering writing a short paper about some college friends from Williams. I was in college with Harry James Smith (author of Mrs. Bumpstead Lee), Max Eastman, and 'Go-to-Hell' Whittlesey. As the editor of the Williams Monthly, I have accepted and rejected manuscripts from both of the latter, and I have memories of their early writing days."
"Then I spent a summer in the Post and Nation in 1908, which is a pleasant chapter to remember; another summer teaching at Columbia; this past summer teaching at the University of California. My favorite recreations are climbing little mountains, chopping wood, and canoeing on Lake Michigan.
"Then I spent a summer at the Post and Nation in 1908, which is a nice chapter to remember; another summer teaching at Columbia; and last summer teaching at the University of California. My favorite activities are climbing small mountains, chopping wood, and canoeing on Lake Michigan."
"This summer I have been picking out a place to die in—or rather looking over the sites offered in California. I lean towards the high Sierras, up above the Yosemite Valley.
"This summer I've been searching for a place to die—or rather checking out the options available in California. I'm leaning towards the high Sierras, up above Yosemite Valley."
Professor Sherman, you will note, is almost an exact contemporary of H. L. Mencken, with whom he has crossed swords in more than one spirited encounter; and Sherman is likely to give as good as he takes in such scuffles, or even rather better. It is high time that his critical sagacity and powerful reasoning were better known in the market-place.
Professor Sherman is nearly the same age as H. L. Mencken, and they've had their fair share of lively debates; Sherman is just as skilled in these exchanges, if not more so. It's about time that his sharp insights and strong reasoning gained more recognition in the public sphere.
UNTIL I met the Butlerians I used to think that the religious spirit in our times was very precious, there was so little of it. I thought one should hold one's breath before it as before the flicker of one's last match on a cold night in the woods. "What if it should go out?" I said; but my apprehension was groundless. It can never go out. The religious spirit is indestructible and constant in quantity like the sum of universal energy in which matches and suns are alike but momentary sparkles and phases. This great truth I learned of the Butlerians: Though the forms and objects of religious belief wax old as a garment and are changed, faith, which is, after all, the precious thing, endures forever. Destroy a man's faith in God and he will worship humanity; destroy his faith in humanity and he will worship science; destroy his faith in science and he will worship himself; destroy his faith in himself and he will worship Samuel Butler.
UNTIL I met the Butlerians, I thought the religious spirit in our time was really special since there was so little of it. I believed one should cherish it like the flicker of their last match on a cold night in the woods. "What if it goes out?" I said; but my worries were unfounded. It can never be extinguished. The religious spirit is unbreakable and constant like the total amount of universal energy, where matches and suns are just temporary sparks and phases. This great truth I learned from the Butlerians: Even though the forms and objects of religious belief grow old like a worn-out garment and change, faith, which is truly the valuable part, lasts forever. If you destroy a person's faith in God, they will worship humanity; if you destroy their faith in humanity, they will worship science; if you destroy their faith in science, they will worship themselves; if you destroy their faith in themselves, they will worship Samuel Butler.
What makes the Butlerian cult so impressive is, of course, that Butler, poor dear, as the English say, was the least worshipful of men. He was not even—till his posthumous disciples made him so—a person of any particular importance. One writing a private memorandum of his death might have produced something like this: Samuel Butler was an unsociable, burry, crotchety, obstinate old bachelor, a dilettante in art and science, an unsuccessful author, a witty cynic of inquisitive temper and, comprehensively speaking, the unregarded Diogenes of the Victorians. Son of a clergyman and grandson of a bishop, born in 1835, educated at Cambridge, he began to prepare for ordination. But, as we are told, because of scruples regarding infant baptism he abandoned the prospect of holy orders and in 1859 sailed for New Zealand, where with capital supplied by his father he engaged in sheep-farming for five years. In 1864, returning to England with £8,000, he established himself for life at Clifford's Inn, London. He devoted some years to painting, adored Handel and dabbled in music, made occasional trips to Sicily and Italy, and wrote a dozen books, which generally fell dead from the press, on religion, literature, art and scientific theory. "Erewhon," however, a Utopian romance published in 1872, had by 1899 sold between three and four thousand copies. Butler made few friends and apparently never married. He died in 1902. His last words were: "Have you brought the cheque book, Alfred?" His body was cremated and the ashes were buried in a garden by his biographer and his man-servant, with nothing to mark the spot.
What makes the Butlerian cult so impressive is, of course, that Butler, poor thing, as the English say, was the least worshipful of men. He wasn’t even—until his posthumous followers made him so—a person of any particular importance. One writing a private memorandum about his death might have said something like this: Samuel Butler was an unsociable, grumpy, stubborn old bachelor, a dabbling enthusiast in art and science, an unsuccessful author, a witty cynic with a curious nature, and, broadly speaking, the overlooked Diogenes of the Victorians. Born in 1835 to a clergyman and the grandson of a bishop, he was educated at Cambridge and began training for ordination. However, as we’re told, due to moral issues surrounding infant baptism, he gave up the idea of becoming a priest and, in 1859, sailed to New Zealand. With financial support from his father, he spent five years sheep-farming. In 1864, he returned to England with £8,000 and settled for life at Clifford's Inn, London. He spent a few years painting, loved Handel, dabbled in music, took occasional trips to Sicily and Italy, and wrote a dozen books on religion, literature, art, and scientific theory, which generally flopped. However, "Erewhon," a Utopian novel published in 1872, had sold between three and four thousand copies by 1899. Butler made few friends and apparently never married. He died in 1902. His last words were: "Have you brought the cheque book, Alfred?" His body was cremated, and his ashes were buried in a garden by his biographer and his servant, with nothing to mark the spot.
Butler's indifference to the disposal of his earthly part betokens no contempt for fame. Denied contemporary renown, he had firmly set his heart on immortality, and quietly, persistently, cannily provided for it. If he could not go down to posterity by the suffrage of his countrymen, he would go down by the shrewd use of his cheque book; he would buy his way in. He bought the publication of most of the books produced in his lifetime. He diligently prepared manuscripts for posthumous publication and accumulated and arranged great masses of materials for a biographer. He insured an interest in his literary remains by bequeathing them and all his copyrights to his literary executor, R. A. Streatfeild. He purchased an interest in a biographer by persuading Henry Festing Jones, a feckless lawyer of Butlerian proclivities, to abandon the law and become his musical and literary companion. In return for these services Mr. Jones received between 1887 and 1900 an allowance of £200 a year, and at Butler's death a bequest of £500, the musical copyrights and the manifest responsibility and privilege of assisting Streatfeild with the propagation of Butler's fame, together with their own, in the next generation.
Butler's lack of concern for what happened to his physical remains doesn’t mean he had any disdain for fame. Lacking recognition in his own time, he was determined to achieve immortality and went about it quietly, persistently, and cleverly. If he couldn’t gain a legacy through the endorsement of his fellow countrymen, he would secure it through the clever use of his finances; he would buy his way in. He funded the publication of most of the books released during his life. He carefully prepared manuscripts for posthumous publication and gathered extensive materials for a biographer. He ensured there would be interest in his literary works by leaving them, along with all his copyrights, to his literary executor, R. A. Streatfeild. He also secured a biographer by convincing Henry Festing Jones, a hapless lawyer with Butler's interests, to leave the law and become his musical and literary companion. In exchange for these services, Mr. Jones received an annual allowance of £200 from 1887 to 1900 and, upon Butler’s death, a bequest of £500, the musical copyrights, and the clear responsibility and privilege of helping Streatfeild promote Butler's reputation, as well as their own, for the next generation.
These good and faithful servants performed their duties with exemplary zeal and astuteness. In 1903, the year following the Master's death, Streatfeild published "The Way of All Flesh," a book packed with satirical wit, the first since "Erewhon" which was capable of walking off on its own legs and exciting general curiosity about its author—curiosity intensified by the announcement that the novel had been written between 1872 and 1884. In the wake of this sensation there began the systematic annual relaunching of old works, with fresh introductions and memoirs and a piecemeal feeding out of other literary remains, culminating in 1917 with the publication of "The Note-Books," a skilful collection and condensation of the whole of Butler's intellectual life. Meanwhile, in 1908, the Erewhon dinner had been instituted. In spite of mild deprecation, this feast, with its two toasts to his Majesty and to the memory of Samuel Butler, assumed from the outset the aspect of a solemn sacrament of believers. Among these was conspicuous on the second occasion Mr. George Bernard Shaw, not quite certain, perhaps, whether he had come to give or to receive honor, whether he was himself to be regarded as the beloved disciple or rather as the one for whom Butler, preaching in the Victorian wilderness, had prepared the way with "free and future-piercing suggestions."
These dedicated and loyal servants did their jobs with outstanding enthusiasm and insight. In 1903, the year after the Master died, Streatfeild published "The Way of All Flesh," a book filled with sharp satire, the first since "Erewhon" that could stand on its own and spark widespread interest in its author—interest heightened by the news that the novel was written between 1872 and 1884. Following this sensation, there was a regular annual revival of old works, complete with new introductions and memoirs, and a gradual release of other literary remnants, culminating in 1917 with the publication of "The Note-Books," a clever collection that summarized Butler's entire intellectual life. Meanwhile, in 1908, the Erewhon dinner was established. Despite some light-hearted criticism, this gathering, with its two toasts—to the King and to the memory of Samuel Butler—quickly took on the tone of a serious ritual for believers. Notably, at the second event, Mr. George Bernard Shaw was present, perhaps unsure if he was there to give or receive honor, whether he should see himself as the favored disciple or as the one for whom Butler, preaching in the Victorian wilderness, had paved the way with "free and future-piercing suggestions."
By 1914 Streatfeild was able to declare that no fragment of Butler's was too insignificant to publish. In 1915 and 1916 appeared extensive critical studies by Gilbert Cannan and John F. Harris. In 1919 at last arrives Henry Festing Jones with the authoritative memoir in two enormous volumes with portraits, documents, sumptuous index, elaborate bibliography and a pious accounting to the public for the original manuscripts, which have been deposited like sacred relics at St. John's College, the Bodleian, the British Museum, the Library of Congress and at various shrines in Italy and Sicily. Here are materials for a fresh consideration of the man in relation to his work.
By 1914, Streatfeild confidently announced that no part of Butler's work was too small to publish. In 1915 and 1916, extensive critical studies were released by Gilbert Cannan and John F. Harris. Finally, in 1919, Henry Festing Jones arrived with the definitive memoir in two massive volumes, featuring portraits, documents, a detailed index, a comprehensive bibliography, and a respectful report to the public about the original manuscripts, which have been stored like treasured relics at St. John's College, the Bodleian, the British Museum, the Library of Congress, and various significant sites in Italy and Sicily. These materials offer a fresh perspective on the man in relation to his work.
The unconverted will say that such a monument to such a man is absurdly disproportionate. But Butler is now more than a man. He is a spiritual ancestor, leader of a movement, moulder of young minds, founder of a faith. His monument is designed not merely to preserve his memory but to mark as well the present importance of the Butlerian sect. The memoir appears to have been written primarily for them. The faithful will no doubt find it delicious; and I, though an outsider, got through it without fatigue and with a kind of perverse pleasure in its perversity.
The unconverted will argue that a monument for such a man is ridiculously exaggerated. But Butler is now more than just a person. He’s a spiritual ancestor, a movement leader, a shaper of young minds, and the founder of a belief system. His monument isn’t just meant to honor his memory but also to highlight the current significance of the Butlerian sect. The memoir seems to be written mainly for them. The faithful will likely find it delightful; and I, although an outsider, managed to read it without feeling tired and experienced a sort of twisted enjoyment in its oddities.
It is very instructive, but it by no means simplifies its puzzling and complex subject. Mr. Jones is not of the biographers who look into the heart of a man, reduce him to a formula and recreate him in accordance with it. He works from the outside, inward, and gradually achieves life and reality by an immense accumulation of objective detail, without ever plucking out, or even plucking at, the heart of the mystery. What was the man's "master passion" and his master faculty? Butler himself did not know; consequently he could not always distinguish his wisdom from his folly. He was an ironist entangled in his own net and an egotist bitten with self-distrust, concealing his wounds in self-assertion and his hesitancies in an external aggressiveness. Mr. Jones pierces the shell here and there, but never removes it. Considering his opportunities, he is sparing in composed studies of his subject based on his own direct observation; and, with all his ingenuousness and his shocking but illuminating indiscretions, he is frequently silent as a tomb where he must certainly possess information for which every reader will inquire, particularly those readers who do not, like the Butlerians, accept Samuel Butler as the happy reincarnation of moderation, common sense and fearless honesty.
It is very informative, but it definitely doesn't make its puzzling and complex subject any simpler. Mr. Jones isn’t one of those biographers who delve into a person's heart, reduce them to a formula, and recreate them accordingly. He approaches from the outside in and gradually brings life and reality through an immense accumulation of objective detail, without ever uncovering, or even touching, the heart of the mystery. What was the man’s "master passion" and his greatest talent? Butler himself didn’t know; as a result, he couldn't always tell his wisdom apart from his folly. He was an ironist caught in his own trap and an egotist plagued by self-doubt, hiding his wounds behind self-assertion and his uncertainties in an outward aggressiveness. Mr. Jones breaks through the surface here and there, but never fully removes it. Considering his opportunities, he is somewhat sparing in well-composed studies of his subject based on his own direct observations; and, despite his sincerity and his shocking but revealing indiscretions, he often remains as silent as a tomb where he must certainly have information that every reader will want, especially those readers who don’t, like the Butlerians, view Samuel Butler as the fortunate embodiment of moderation, common sense, and fearless honesty.
The whole case of the Georgians against the Victorians might be fought out over his life and works; and indeed there has already been many a skirmish in that quarter. For, of course, neither Streatfeild nor Mr. Jones is ultimately responsible for his revival. Ultimately Butler's vogue is due to the fact that he is a friend of the Georgian revolution against idealism in the very citadel of the enemy; the extraordinary acclaim with which he is now received is his reward for having long ago prepared to betray the Victorians into the hands of a ruthless posterity. He was a traitor to his own times, and therefore it follows that he was a man profoundly disillusioned. The question which we may all reasonably raise with regard to a traitor whom we have received within our lines is whether he will make us a good citizen. We should like to know pretty thoroughly how he fell out with his countrymen—whether through defects in his own temper and character or through a clear-eyed and righteous indignation with the incorrigible viciousness of their manners and institutions. We should like to know what vision of reformation succeeded his disillusion. Hitherto the Georgians have been more eloquent in their disillusions than in their visions, and have inclined to welcome Butler as a dissolving agent without much inspecting his solution.
The whole argument between the Georgians and the Victorians could be explored through his life and work; in fact, there have already been many debates in that area. Of course, neither Streatfeild nor Mr. Jones is ultimately responsible for his resurgence. Ultimately, Butler's popularity comes from the fact that he represents the Georgian revolution against idealism at its very core; the incredible praise he is currently receiving is his reward for having long ago set up the Victorians for a harsh future. He was a traitor to his own time, which means he was a deeply disillusioned man. The question we can all reasonably ask about a traitor we have accepted into our ranks is whether he will become a good citizen. We want to understand how he came to disagree with his fellow countrymen—was it due to flaws in his own personality or a clear-sighted and righteous outrage at the persistent wrongdoing in their behavior and systems? We want to know what vision for reform he had after his disillusionment. So far, the Georgians have been more vocal about their disillusionments than their visions and have tended to embrace Butler as a disruptive force without closely examining his solutions.
The Butlerians admire Butler for his withering attack on family life, notably in "The Way of All Flesh"; and many a studious literary man with a talkative wife and eight romping children would, of course, admit an occasional flash of romantic envy for Butler's bachelor apartments. Mr. Jones tells us that Theobald and Christina Pontifex, whose nakedness Butler uncovers, were drawn without exaggeration from his own father and mother. His work on them is a masterpiece of pitiless satire. Butler appears to have hated his father, despised his mother and loathed his sisters in all truth and sincerity. He nursed his vindictive and contemptuous feelings towards them all through his life; he studied these feelings, made notes on them, jested out of them, lived in them, reduced them to a philosophy of domestic antipathy.
The Butlerians respect Butler for his scathing critique of family life, especially in "The Way of All Flesh"; and many a thoughtful literary guy with a chatty wife and eight playful kids would, of course, feel a twinge of romantic envy for Butler's bachelor pad. Mr. Jones tells us that Theobald and Christina Pontifex, whose vulnerabilities Butler exposes, were depicted without exaggeration from his own parents. His portrayal of them is a masterful example of ruthless satire. Butler seems to have truly hated his father, despised his mother, and felt genuine disdain for his sisters. He held onto his bitter and contemptuous feelings towards them throughout his life; he reflected on these feelings, took notes on them, made jokes from them, lived within them, and turned them into a philosophy of domestic resentment.
He was far more learned than any other English author in the psychology of impiety. When he heard some one say, "Two are better than one," he exclaimed, "Yes, but the man who said that did not know my sisters." When he was forty-eight years old he wrote to a friend that his father was in poor health and not likely to recover; "but may hang on for months or go off with the N. E. winds which we are sure to have later on." In the same letter he writes that he is going to strike out forty weak pages in "Erewhon" and stick in forty stronger ones on the "trial of a middle-aged man 'for not having lost his father at a suitable age.'" His father's one unpardonable offense was not dying early and so enlarging his son's income. If this had been a jest, it would have been a little coarse for a deathbed. But Mr. Jones, who appears to think it very amusing, proves clearly enough that it was not a jest, but an obsession, and a horrid obsession it was. Now a man who attacks the family because his father does not die as promptly as could be desired is not likely to propose a happy substitute: his mood is not reconstructive, funny though it may be in two old boys of fifty, like Butler and Jones, living along like spoiled children on allowances, Butler from his father, Jones from his mother.
He was much more knowledgeable than any other English author about the psychology of disrespect. When he heard someone say, "Two are better than one," he exclaimed, "Yes, but the guy who said that didn’t know my sisters." When he was forty-eight, he wrote to a friend that his father was in poor health and not likely to recover; "but he might hang on for months or pass away with the Northeastern winds that we’re sure to have later on." In the same letter, he mentioned that he was planning to cut out forty weak pages in "Erewhon" and replace them with forty stronger ones about "the trial of a middle-aged man 'for not having lost his father at a suitable age.'" His father's only unforgivable sin was not dying early and thus not increasing his son's income. If this had been a joke, it would have been a bit harsh for a deathbed moment. But Mr. Jones, who seems to find it quite funny, clearly shows that it wasn’t a joke but an obsession, and a terrible one at that. Now, a guy who criticizes his family because his father doesn’t die as quickly as he wants is unlikely to suggest a happy alternative: his outlook isn’t constructive, funny though it may seem in two old men of fifty, like Butler and Jones, living like spoiled kids on allowances, Butler from his father, Jones from his mother.
The Butlerians admire Butler for his brilliant attack on "romantic" relations between the sexes. Before the advent of Shaw he poured poison on the roots of that imaginative love in which all normal men and maidens walk at least once in a lifetime as in a rosy cloud shot through with golden lights.
The Butlerians look up to Butler for his sharp critique of "romantic" relationships between men and women. Before Shaw came along, he undermined the foundation of that idealized love that every normal man and woman experiences at least once in their lives, like being in a dreamy haze filled with golden light.
His portraits show a man of vigorous physique, capable of passion, a face distinctly virile, rather harshly bearded, with broad masculine eyebrows. Was he ever in love? If not, why was he not? Elementary questions which his biographer after a thousand pages leaves unanswered. Mr. Jones asserts that both Overton and Ernest in "The Way of All Flesh" are in the main accurately autobiographical, and he furnishes much evidence for the point. He remarks a divergence in this fact, that Butler, unlike his hero, was never in prison. Did Butler, like his hero, have children and farm them out? The point is of some interest in the case of a man who is helping us to destroy the conventional family.
His portraits depict a man with a strong physique, capable of deep emotions, a face that is distinctly masculine, with a rather rugged beard and broad eyebrows. Was he ever in love? If not, why not? Simple questions that his biographer leaves unanswered after a thousand pages. Mr. Jones claims that both Overton and Ernest in "The Way of All Flesh" are largely autobiographical, and he provides plenty of evidence to support this. He notes a significant difference: unlike his hero, Butler was never imprisoned. Did Butler, like his hero, have children and send them away? This is an interesting point considering a man who is helping us rethink the traditional family.
Mr. Jones leaves quite in the dark his relations with such women as the late Queen Victoria would not have approved, relations which J. B. Yeats has, however, publicly discussed. Mr. Jones is ordinarily cynical enough, candid enough, as we shall see. He takes pains to tell us that his own grandfather was never married. He does not hesitate to acknowledge abundance of moral ugliness in his subject. Why this access of Victorian reticence at a point where plain-speaking is the order of the day and the special pride of contemporary Erewhonians? Why did a young man of Butler's tastes leave the church and go into exile in New Zealand for five years? Could a more resolute biographer perhaps find a more "realistic" explanation than difficulties over infant baptism? Mr. Shaw told his publisher that Butler was "a shy old bird." In some respects he was also a sly old bird.
Mr. Jones keeps his relationships with women, which the late Queen Victoria wouldn't have approved of, quite secret, although J. B. Yeats has talked about them publicly. Mr. Jones is usually cynical and open, as we’ll see. He makes it a point to tell us that his grandfather was never married. He doesn’t hesitate to admit there's plenty of moral ugliness in his subject. Why this sudden Victorian restraint when straightforward talk is the norm and a point of pride for contemporary Erewhonians? Why did a young man with Butler's interests leave the church and live in New Zealand for five years? Could a more determined biographer perhaps provide a more “realistic” explanation than issues with infant baptism? Mr. Shaw told his publisher that Butler was "a shy old bird." In some ways, he was also a clever old bird.
Among the "future-piercing suggestions" extolled by Mr. Shaw we may be sure that the author of "Man and Superman" was pleased to acknowledge Butler's prediscovery that woman is the pursuer. This idea we may now trace quite definitely to his relations with Miss Savage, a witty, sensible, presumably virtuous woman of about his own age, living in a club in London, who urged him to write fiction, read all his manuscripts, knitted him socks, reviewed his books in women's magazines and corresponded with him for years till she died, without his knowledge, in hospital from cancer. Her letters are Mr. Jones' mainstay in his first volume and she is, except Butler himself, altogether his most interesting personality. Mr. Jones says that being unable to find any one who could authorize him to use her letters, he publishes them on his own responsibility. But he adds, "I cannot imagine that any relation of hers who may read her letters will experience any feelings other than pride and delight." This lady, he tells us, was the original of Alethea Pontifex. But he marks a difference. Alethea was handsome. Miss Savage, he says, was short, fat, had hip disease, and "that kind of dowdiness which I used to associate with ladies who had been at school with my mother." Butler became persuaded that Miss Savage loved him; this bored him; and the correspondence would lapse till he felt the need of her cheery friendship again. On one occasion she wrote to him, "I wish that you did not know wrong from right." Mr. Jones believes that she was alluding to his scrupulousness in matters of business. Butler himself construed the words as an overture to which he was indisposed to respond. The debate on this point and the pretty uncertainty in which it is left can surely arouse in Miss Savage's relations no other feelings than "pride and delight."
Among the "forward-thinking suggestions" praised by Mr. Shaw, we can be sure that the author of "Man and Superman" appreciated Butler's earlier insight that women are the ones who pursue. We can clearly connect this idea to his relationship with Miss Savage, a witty, sensible, and presumably virtuous woman around his age, living in a club in London. She encouraged him to write fiction, read all his manuscripts, knitted him socks, reviewed his books for women’s magazines, and corresponded with him for years until she passed away, without his knowledge, in a hospital from cancer. Her letters serve as Mr. Jones' main source in his first volume, and she is, apart from Butler himself, the most interesting figure. Mr. Jones notes that since he couldn't find anyone to authorize him to use her letters, he publishes them at his own risk. However, he adds, "I can't imagine that any relative of hers reading her letters will feel anything but pride and joy." This lady, he tells us, was the inspiration for Alethea Pontifex. But he points out a difference: Alethea was attractive, while Miss Savage, he says, was short, overweight, had a hip disease, and had "that kind of dowdiness I used to associate with women who went to school with my mother." Butler became convinced that Miss Savage loved him, but that bored him, leading to lulls in their correspondence until he felt the need for her cheerful friendship again. At one point, she wrote to him, "I wish you didn’t know right from wrong." Mr. Jones believes she was referring to his strictness regarding business matters. Butler himself interpreted her words as an invitation he was unwilling to accept. The discussion about this and the ambiguity surrounding it can surely evoke in Miss Savage's relatives no feelings other than "pride and delight."
This brings us to the Butlerian substitute for the chivalry which used to be practised by those who bore what the Victorians called "the grand old name of gentleman." In his later years, after the death of Miss Savage, in periods of loneliness, depression and ill-health, Butler made notes on his correspondence reproaching himself for his ill-treatment of her. "He also," says his biographer, "tried to express his remorse" in two sonnets from which I extract some lines:
This brings us to Butler's alternative to the chivalry that was once upheld by those who were known in Victorian times as "the grand old name of gentleman." In his later years, after Miss Savage's death, during times of loneliness, depression, and poor health, Butler noted his feelings about his correspondence, criticizing himself for how he treated her. "He also," according to his biographer, "attempted to convey his remorse" in two sonnets, from which I will share some lines:
She was too nice, pursued too relentlessly, |
Wrote heartfelt letters to me every day; |
No matter how hard I tried to love, it was in vain, |
For she was plain, clumsy, overweight, and short, |
Forty and overly generous. |
It's said that if a woman pursues a man, no man |
Should wait for her to succeed; and in truth, |
A man will give in for compassion if he can, |
But if the body resists, what can he do? |
I couldn't do it, so I've been sad my whole life. |
The mistake I made was that I didn't do anything wrong. |
The descendants of eminent Victorians may well be thankful that their fathers had no intimate relations with Butler. There is a familiar story of Whistler, that when some one praised his latest portrait as equal to Velasquez, he snapped back, "Yes, but why lug in Velasquez?" Butler, with similar aversion for rivals, but without Whistler's extempore wit, slowly excogitated his killing sallies and entered them in his note-books or sent them in a letter to Miss Savage, preserving a copy for the delectation of the next age: "I do not see how I can well call Mr. Darwin the Pecksniff of Science, though this is exactly what he is; but I think I may call Lord Bacon the Pecksniff of his age and then, a little later, say that Mr. Darwin is the Bacon of the Victorian Era." To this he adds another note reminding himself to call "Tennyson the Darwin of Poetry, and Darwin the Tennyson of Science." I can recall but one work of a contemporary mentioned favorably in the biography; perhaps there are two. The staple of his comment runs about as follows: "Middlemarch" is a "longwinded piece of studied brag"; of "John Inglesant," "I seldom was more displeased with any book"; of "Aurora Leigh," "I dislike it very much, but I liked it better than Mrs. Browning, or Mr., either"; of Rossetti, "I dislike his face and his manner and his work, and I hate his poetry and his friends"; of George Meredith, "No wonder if his work repels me that mine should repel him"; "all I remember is that I disliked and distrusted Morley"; of Gladstone, "Who was it said that he was 'a good man in the very worst sense of the words'?" The homicidal spirit here exhibited may be fairly related to his anxiety for the death of his father.
The descendants of prominent Victorians might be glad that their ancestors didn't have close ties with Butler. There's a well-known story about Whistler: when someone complimented his latest portrait, saying it was as good as Velasquez, he retorted, "Yes, but why bring up Velasquez?" Butler had a similar disdain for rivals but lacked Whistler's quick wit; instead, he carefully thought out his sharp remarks and wrote them down in his notebooks or sent them in letters to Miss Savage, keeping a copy for future readers. He noted, “I can’t really call Mr. Darwin the Pecksniff of Science, even though that’s exactly what he is; but I think I can call Lord Bacon the Pecksniff of his time and then, a little later, say that Mr. Darwin is the Bacon of the Victorian Era.” He also made a note to refer to "Tennyson as the Darwin of Poetry, and Darwin as the Tennyson of Science." I can only recall one piece by a contemporary that he mentioned positively in the biography; maybe there were two. His comments usually went something like this: "Middlemarch" is a "long-winded piece of pretentious brag"; about "John Inglesant," he wrote, "I was rarely more displeased with a book"; of "Aurora Leigh," he stated, "I dislike it very much, but I liked it better than Mrs. Browning or Mr. Browning, either"; regarding Rossetti, he said, "I dislike his face and his attitude and his work, and I hate his poetry and his friends"; about George Meredith, he noted, "No wonder if my work repels him, since his repels me"; "all I remember is that I disliked and distrusted Morley"; and concerning Gladstone, he asked, "Who was it that said he was 'a good man in the very worst sense of the words'?" The violent sentiment he expressed here might be connected to his anxiety about his father's death.
It was on the whole characteristic of Victorian free-thinkers to attack Christianity with reverence and discrimination in an attempt to preserve its substance while removing obstacles to the acceptance of its substance. Butler was Voltairean. When he did not attack mischievously like a gamin, he attacked vindictively like an Italian laborer whose sweetheart has been false to him. I have seen it stated that he was a broad churchman and a communicant; and Mr. Jones produces a letter from a clergyman testifying to his "saintliness." But this must be some of Mr. Jones's fun. From Gibbon, read on the voyage to New Zealand, Butler imbibed, he says, in a letter of 1861, "a calm and philosophic spirit of impartial and critical investigation." In 1862 he writes: "For the present I renounce Christianity altogether. You say people must have something to believe in. I can only say that I have not found my digestion impeded since I left off believing in what does not appear to be supported by sufficient evidence." When in 1865 he printed his "Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ," the manner of his attack was impish; and so was the gleeful exchange of notes between him and Miss Savage over the way the orthodox swallowed the bait. In his notebook he wrote: "Mead is the lowest of the intoxicants, just as Church is the lowest of the dissipations, and carraway seed the lowest of the condiments." He went to church once in 1883 to please a friend and was asked whether it had not bored him as inconsistent with his principles. "I said that, having given up Christianity, I was not going to be hampered by its principles. It was the substance of Christianity, and not its accessories of external worship, that I had objected to ... so I went to church out of pure cussedness." Finally, in a note of 1889: "There will be no comfortable and safe development of our social arrangements—I mean we shall not get infanticide, and the permission of suicide, nor cheap and easy divorce—till Jesus Christ's ghost has been laid; and the best way to lay it is to be a moderate churchman."
It was typical of Victorian free-thinkers to critique Christianity with respect and discernment, trying to keep its core while clearing away barriers to its acceptance. Butler had a Voltairean perspective. When he wasn't playfully attacking like a mischievous child, he was fiercely attacking like an Italian laborer betrayed by his lover. I've seen it claimed that he was a broad churchman and a churchgoer, and Mr. Jones has a letter from a clergyman vouching for his "saintliness." But that must be some of Mr. Jones's humor. From Gibbon, whom he read on his journey to New Zealand, Butler absorbed, as he mentioned in a letter from 1861, "a calm and philosophical spirit of impartial and critical investigation." In 1862 he wrote: "For now, I completely reject Christianity. You say people need something to believe in. I can only say that my digestion hasn’t suffered since I stopped believing in what doesn’t seem to have enough evidence." When he published his "Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ" in 1865, his way of engaging was playful; so was the cheerful correspondence between him and Miss Savage about how the orthodox took the bait. In his notebook, he wrote: "Mead is the lowest of the intoxicants, just as Church is the lowest of the distractions, and caraway seed the lowest of the seasonings." He attended church once in 1883 to please a friend and was asked if he found it boring, given his principles. "I said that, having given up Christianity, I wasn't going to be restricted by its principles. It was the essence of Christianity, not its external forms of worship, that I had issues with... so I went to church just for the sake of being contrary." Finally, in a note from 1889: "There won’t be any comfortable and secure evolution of our social structures—I mean we won’t get infanticide, nor permission for suicide, or easy divorce—until the ghost of Jesus Christ is laid to rest; and the best way to do that is to be a moderate churchman."
Robert Burns was a free-thinker, but he wrote the "Cotter's Saturday Night"; Renan was a free-thinker, but he buried his God in purple; Matthew Arnold was a free-thinker, but he gave new life to the religious poetry of the Bible; Henry Adams believed only in mathematical physics, but he wrote of Mont St. Michel and Chartres with chivalrous and almost Catholic tenderness for the Virgin: for in all these diverse men there was reverence for what men have adored as their highest. There was respect for a tomb, even for the tomb of a God. Butler, having transferred his faith to the Bank of England, diverted himself like a street Arab with a slingshot by peppering the church windows. He established manners for the contemporary Butlerian who, coming down to breakfast on Christmas morning, exclaims with a pleased smile, "Well, this is the birthday of the hook-nosed Nazarene!"
Robert Burns was a free-thinker, but he wrote "Cotter's Saturday Night"; Renan was a free-thinker, but he buried his God in purple; Matthew Arnold was a free-thinker, but he revitalized the religious poetry of the Bible; Henry Adams believed only in mathematical physics, but he wrote about Mont St. Michel and Chartres with noble and almost Catholic tenderness for the Virgin: for in all these different men there was a reverence for what people have worshiped as their highest. There was respect for a grave, even for the grave of a God. Butler, having transferred his faith to the Bank of England, entertained himself like a street kid with a slingshot by shooting at the church windows. He set the standards for the modern Butlerian who, coming down to breakfast on Christmas morning, smiles and says, "Well, this is the birthday of the hook-nosed Nazarene!"
Butler's moral note is rather attractive to young and middle-aged persons: "We have all sinned and come short of the glory of making ourselves as comfortable as we easily might have done." His ethics is founded realistically on physiology and economics; for "goodness is naught unless it tends towards old age and sufficiency of means." Pleasure, dressed like a quiet man of the world, is the best teacher: "The devil, when he dresses himself in angels' clothes, can only be detected by experts of exceptional skill, and so often does he adopt this disguise that it is hardly safe to be seen talking to an angel at all, and prudent people will follow after pleasure as a more homely but more respectable and on the whole more trustworthy guide." There we have something of the tone of our genial Franklin; but Butler is a Franklin without a single impulse of Franklin's wide benevolence and practical beneficence, a Franklin shorn of the spirit of his greatness, namely, his immensely intelligent social consciousness.
Butler's moral perspective is quite appealing to both young and middle-aged people: "We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of making ourselves as comfortable as we easily could have." His ethics are realistically based on physiology and economics; because "goodness is nothing unless it leads to old age and having enough resources." Pleasure, appearing as a calm person of the world, is the best teacher: "The devil, when he dresses in angels' clothes, can only be recognized by experts of exceptional skill, and he often uses this disguise, making it risky to be seen talking to an angel at all, so sensible people will pursue pleasure as a more familiar, yet more respectable and generally more reliable guide." This reflects some of the tone of our friendly Franklin; however, Butler is a version of Franklin lacking any of his broad kindness and practical generosity, a Franklin stripped of the essence of his greatness, which is his deep social awareness.
Having disposed of Christianity, orthodox and otherwise, and having reduced the morality of "enlightened selfishness" to its lowest terms, Butler turned in the same spirit to the destruction of orthodox Victorian science. We are less concerned for the moment with his substance than with his character and manner as scientific controversialist. "If I cannot," he wrote, "and I know I cannot, get the literary and scientific bigwigs to give me a shilling, I can, and I know I can, heave bricks into the middle of them." Though such professional training as he had was for the church and for painting, he seems never to have doubted that his mother wit was sufficient equipment, supplemented by reading in the British Museum, for the overthrow of men like Darwin, Wallace and Huxley, who from boyhood had given their lives to collecting, studying and experimenting with scientific data. "I am quite ready to admit," he records, "that I am in a conspiracy of one against men of science in general." Having felt himself covertly slighted in a book for which Darwin was responsible, he vindictively assailed, not merely the work, but also the character of Darwin and his friends, who, naturally inferring that he was an unscrupulous "bounder" seeking notoriety, generally ignored him.
Having dismissed Christianity, both orthodox and otherwise, and boiled down the morality of "enlightened selfishness" to its simplest form, Butler then turned his efforts toward undermining orthodox Victorian science. For now, we’re more interested in his character and approach as a scientific debater than in his actual arguments. "If I can't," he wrote, "and I know I can't, get the literary and scientific big shots to give me a dime, I can, and I know I can, throw bricks at them." Although his professional training had been for the church and painting, he never seemed to doubt that his common sense, along with some reading at the British Museum, was enough to take on people like Darwin, Wallace, and Huxley, who had dedicated their lives since childhood to gathering, studying, and experimenting with scientific data. "I am quite ready to admit," he noted, "that I am in a conspiracy of one against men of science in general." Feeling slighted by a book attributed to Darwin, he vindictively attacked not just the work but also the character of Darwin and his associates, who, naturally concluding that he was a shady "bounder" seeking fame, mostly ignored him.
His first "contribution" to evolutionary theory had been a humorous skit, written in New Zealand, on the evolution of machines, suggested by "The Origin of Species," and later included in "Erewhon." To support this whimsy he found it useful to revive the abandoned "argument from design"; and mother wit, still working whimsically, leaped to the conception that the organs of our bodies are machines. Thereupon he commenced serious scientific speculator, and produced "Life and Habit," 1878; "Evolution Old and New," 1879; "Unconscious Memory," 1880; and "Luck or Cunning," 1886. The germ of all his speculations, contained in his first volume, is the notion of "the oneness of personality existing between parents and offspring up to the time that the offspring leaves the parent's body"; thence develops his theory that the offspring "unconsciously" remembers what happened to the parents; and thence his theory that a vitalistic purposeful cunning, as opposed to the Darwinian chance, is the significant factor in evolution. His theory has something in common with current philosophical speculation, and it is in part, as I understand, a kind of adumbration, a shrewd guess, at the present attitude of cytologists. It has thus entitled Butler to half a dozen footnotes in a centenary volume on Darwin; but it hardly justifies his transference of Darwin's laurels to Button, Lamarck, Erasmus Darwin and himself; nor does it justify his reiterated contention that Darwin was a plagiarist, a fraud, a Pecksniff and a liar. He swelled the ephemeral body of scientific speculation; but his contribution to the verified body of science was negligible, and the injuries that he inflicted upon the scientific spirit were considerable.
His first "contribution" to evolutionary theory was a funny skit, written in New Zealand, about the evolution of machines, inspired by "The Origin of Species," and later included in "Erewhon." To back this whimsical idea, he found it helpful to revive the neglected "argument from design"; and common sense, still working playfully, jumped to the idea that our body organs are like machines. He then began to seriously speculate scientifically and produced "Life and Habit," 1878; "Evolution Old and New," 1879; "Unconscious Memory," 1880; and "Luck or Cunning," 1886. The core of all his ideas, found in his first book, is the concept of "the oneness of personality that exists between parents and children until the child leaves the parent's body"; from there, he develops his theory that the child "unconsciously" remembers the experiences of the parents; and from there, his theory that a vitalistic, purposeful cunning, as opposed to Darwinian chance, is the key factor in evolution. His theory shares some similarities with current philosophical speculation and is, as I understand it, a kind of foreshadowing, a smart guess, at the current views of cytologists. This has earned Butler a few footnotes in a centennial volume on Darwin; however, it does not justify his claim that he should share Darwin's honors with Button, Lamarck, Erasmus Darwin, and himself; nor does it support his repeated assertion that Darwin was a plagiarist, a fraud, a hypocrite, and a liar. He expanded the temporary body of scientific speculation; but his actual contribution to the established body of science was minimal, and the damage he caused to the scientific spirit was significant.
For their symptomatic value, we must glance at Butler's sallies into some other fields. He held as an educational principle that it is hardly worth while to study any subject till one is ready to use it. When in his fifties he wished to write music, he took up for the first time the study of counterpoint. Mr. Garnett having inquired what subject Butler and Jones would take up when they had finished "Narcissus," Butler said that they "might write an oratorio on some sacred subject"; and when Garnett asked whether they had anything in particular in mind, he replied that they were thinking of "The Woman Taken in Adultery." In the same decade he cheerfully applied for the Slade professorship of art at Cambridge; and he took credit for the rediscovery of a lost school of sculpture.
For their significance, we should look at Butler's ventures into different areas. He believed as an educational principle that there's little point in studying a subject until you're ready to apply it. When he was in his fifties and wanted to write music, he started studying counterpoint for the first time. When Mr. Garnett asked what Butler and Jones would focus on after finishing "Narcissus," Butler mentioned they might write an oratorio on a sacred theme; and when Garnett pressed for specifics, he said they were considering "The Woman Taken in Adultery." In that same decade, he eagerly applied for the Slade professorship of art at Cambridge, claiming credit for rediscovering a lost school of sculpture.
At the age of fifty-five he brushed up his Greek, which he "had not wholly forgotten," and read the "Odyssey" for the purposes of his oratorio, "Ulysses." When he got to Circe it suddenly flashed upon him that he was reading the work of a young woman! Thereupon he produced his book, "The Authoress of the Odyssey," with portrait of the authoress, Nausicaa, identification of her birthplace in Sicily, which pleased the Sicilians, and an account of the way in which she wrote her poem. It was the most startling literary discovery since Delia Bacon burst into the silent sea on which Colonel Fabyan of the biliteral cypher is the latest navigator. That the classical scholars laughed at or ignored him did not shake his belief that the work was as important as anything he had done. "Perhaps it was," he would have remarked, if any one else had written it. "I am a prose man," he wrote to Robert Bridges, "and, except Homer and Shakespeare"—he should have added Nausicaa—"I have read absolutely nothing of English poetry and very little of English prose." His inacquaintance with English poetry, however, did not embarrass him, when, two years after bringing out his Sicilian authoress, he cleared up the mysteries of Shakespeare's sonnets. Nor did it prevent his dismissing the skeptical Dr. Furnivall, after a discussion at an A. B. C. shop, as a poor old incompetent. "Nothing," said Alethea Pontifex, speaking for her creator, "is well done nor worth doing unless, take it all round, it has come pretty easily." The poor old doctor, like the Greek scholars and the professional men of science, had blunted his wits by too much research.
At fifty-five, he refreshed his Greek, which he "hadn't completely forgotten," and read the "Odyssey" for his oratorio, "Ulysses." When he reached Circe, it suddenly hit him that he was reading a work by a young woman! He then published his book, "The Authoress of the Odyssey," featuring a portrait of the authoress, Nausicaa, identifying her birthplace in Sicily, which the Sicilians loved, along with a description of how she wrote her poem. It was the most shocking literary discovery since Delia Bacon made waves in the quiet sea where Colonel Fabyan, the latest navigator of the biliteral cipher, explored. The fact that classical scholars laughed at or ignored him didn’t shake his belief that the work was as significant as anything he had accomplished. "Maybe it would be," he would have said if someone else had written it. "I’m a prose guy," he wrote to Robert Bridges, "and except for Homer and Shakespeare"—he should have added Nausicaa—"I haven’t read much of English poetry and very little of English prose." His lack of familiarity with English poetry, however, didn’t bother him when, two years after publishing his Sicilian authoress, he uncovered the mysteries of Shakespeare's sonnets. Nor did it stop him from dismissing the skeptical Dr. Furnivall, after a conversation at an A. B. C. shop, as a poor old fool. "Nothing," said Alethea Pontifex, speaking for her creator, "is well done or worth doing unless, all things considered, it has come pretty easily." The poor old doctor, like the Greek scholars and the professionals in science, had dulled his mind with too much research.
Butler maintained that every man's work is a portrait of himself, and in his own case the features stand out ruggedly enough. Why should any one see in this infatuated pursuer of paradox a reincarnation of the pagan wisdom? In his small personal affairs he shows a certain old-maidish tidiness and the prudence of an experienced old bachelor, who manages his little pleasures without scandal. But in his intellectual life what vestige do we find of the Greek or even of the Roman sobriety, poise and decorum? In one respect Butler was conservative: he respected the established political and economic order. But he respected it only because it enabled him, without bestirring himself about his bread and butter, to sit quietly in his rooms at Clifford's Inn and invent attacks on every other form of orthodoxy. With a desire to be conspicuous only surpassed by his desire to be original he worked out the central Butlerian principle; videlicet: The fact that all the best qualified judges agree that a thing is true and valuable establishes an overwhelming presumption that it is valueless and false. With his feet firmly planted on this grand radical maxim he employed his lively wit with lawyer-like ingenuity to make out a case against family life, of which he was incapable; against imaginative love, of which he was ignorant; against chivalry, otherwise the conventions of gentlemen, which he had but imperfectly learned; against Victorian men of letters, whom, by his own account, he had never read; against altruistic morality and the substance of Christianity, which were repugnant to his selfishness and other vices; against Victorian men of science, whose researches he had never imitated; and against Elizabethan and classical scholarship, which he took up in an odd moment as one plays a game of solitaire before going to bed. To his disciples he could not bequeath his cleverness; but he left them his recipe for originality, his manners and his assurance, which has been gathering compound interest ever since. In the original manuscript of "Alps and Sanctuaries" he consigned "Raffaele, along with Socrates, Virgil [the last two displaced later by Plato and Dante], Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Goethe, Beethoven, and another, to limbo as the Seven Humbugs of Christiandom." Who was the unnamed seventh?
Butler argued that every person's work is a reflection of themselves, and in his case, the traits stand out quite clearly. Why should anyone see in this obsessed seeker of contradictions a revival of ancient wisdom? In his personal matters, he displays a certain neatness reminiscent of a meticulous old maid and the caution of a seasoned bachelor, who manages his small pleasures without drawing attention. But in his intellectual pursuits, where do we find any trace of Greek or even Roman dignity, balance, and decorum? In one way, Butler was conservative: he respected the established political and economic system. But he did so only because it allowed him, without worrying about his livelihood, to sit quietly in his rooms at Clifford's Inn and craft criticisms of every other belief system. His desire to stand out was only topped by his wish to be original, leading him to formulate the central Butlerian principle: the fact that all the most qualified judges agree a thing is true and valuable creates a strong presumption that it is worthless and false. Standing firmly on this bold radical notion, he cleverly used his wit, almost like a lawyer, to argue against family life, which he was incapable of; against romantic love, which he knew nothing about; against chivalry, or the norms of gentlemen, which he had only partly grasped; against Victorian writers, whom he claimed to have never read; against altruistic morality and the essence of Christianity, which clashed with his selfishness and other flaws; against Victorian scientists, whose research he never attempted to replicate; and against both Elizabethan and classical scholarship, which he dabbled in occasionally, like playing a game of solitaire before bed. He couldn't pass on his cleverness to his followers, but he did leave them his method for originality, his demeanor, and his confidence, which has been accruing interest ever since. In the original manuscript of "Alps and Sanctuaries," he dismissed "Raffaele, along with Socrates, Virgil [later replaced by Plato and Dante], Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Goethe, Beethoven, and another, to limbo as the Seven Humbugs of Christendom." Who was the unnamed seventh?
BED-BOOKS AND NIGHT-LIGHTS
By H.M. Tomlinson
I shall not forget with what a thrill of delight I came upon H. M. Tomlinson's Old Junk, the volume of essays from which this is borrowed. One feels, in stumbling upon such a book, much as some happy and astounded readers must have felt in 1878 when An Inland Voyage came out. It makes one wonder, submitting one's self to the moving music and magic of that prose, so simple and yet so subtle in its flavor, whether poetry is not, after all, an inferior and more mechanic form. "The cool element of prose," that perfect phrase of Milton's, comes back to mind. How direct and satisfying a passage to the mind Mr. Tomlinson's paragraphs have. How they build and cumulate, how the sentences shift, turn and move in delicate loops and ridges under the blowing wind of thought, like the sand of the dunes that he describes in one essay. And through it all, as intangible but as real and beautifying as moonlight, there is the pervading brightness of a particular way of looking at the world, something for which we have no catchword, the illumination of a spirit at once humorous, melancholy, shrewd, lovely and humane. Somehow, when one is caught in the web of that exquisite, considered prose, the awkward symbols of speech seem transparent; we come close to a man's mind.
I won't forget the thrill I felt when I discovered H. M. Tomlinson's Old Junk, the collection of essays from which this is taken. Stumbling upon such a book feels a lot like what some lucky and amazed readers must have experienced in 1878 when An Inland Voyage was published. It makes you think, as you immerse yourself in the moving music and magic of that prose—so straightforward yet so rich in flavor—whether poetry might actually be an inferior and more mechanical form. "The cool element of prose," that perfect phrase of Milton’s, comes to mind. Mr. Tomlinson's paragraphs have such a direct and satisfying impact on the mind. They build and accumulate, with sentences that shift, turn, and flow in delicate loops and ridges under the breeze of thought, much like the sand dunes he describes in one of his essays. Throughout it all, as intangible yet as real and beautifying as moonlight, there's a consistent brightness in his unique perspective on the world—something we can’t quite name, the illumination of a spirit that's humorous, melancholic, sharp, beautiful, and deeply humane. Somehow, when you're caught in the weave of that exquisite, thoughtful prose, the clumsy symbols of language seem transparent; we get close to a person's mind.
In Mr. Tomlinson's three books—The Sea and the Jungle (1912), Old Junk (1920) and London River (1921) is revealed one of the most sincere and perfect workmen in contemporary prose.
In Mr. Tomlinson's three books—The Sea and the Jungle (1912), Old Junk (1920), and London River (1921)—we see one of the most genuine and skilled writers in modern prose.
H. M. Tomlinson was born in 1873; among his early memories he records: "I was an office boy and a clerk among London's ships, in the last days of the clippers. And I am forced to recall some of the things—such as bookkeeping in a jam factory and stoking on a tramp steamer." He joined the staff of the London Morning Leader in 1904; which was later merged with the Daily News, and to this journal he was attached for several years. During the War he was a correspondent in France; at the danger of incurring his anger (should he see this) I quote Mr. S. K. Ratcliffe on this phase of his work:—"One who was the friend of all, a sweet and fine spirit moving untouched amid the ruin and terror, expressing itself everywhere with perfect simplicity, and at times with a shattering candor."
H. M. Tomlinson was born in 1873; among his early memories he writes: "I was an office boy and a clerk among London's ships, in the last days of the clippers. And I have to remember some of the things—like bookkeeping in a jam factory and stoking on a tramp steamer." He joined the staff of the London Morning Leader in 1904; which later merged with the Daily News, and he worked for this journal for several years. During the War, he was a correspondent in France; at the risk of upsetting him (if he were to see this), I quote Mr. S. K. Ratcliffe on this period of his work:—"One who was the friend of all, a sweet and fine spirit moving untouched amid the ruin and terror, expressing itself everywhere with perfect simplicity, and at times with a shattering candor."
In 1917 he became associate editor of the London Nation, where, if you are interested, you may find his initials almost weekly.
In 1917, he became the associate editor of the London Nation, where, if you're interested, you can find his initials almost every week.
THE rain flashed across the midnight window with a myriad feet. There was a groan in outer darkness, the voice of all nameless dreads. The nervous candle-flame shuddered by my bedside. The groaning rose to a shriek, and the little flame jumped in a panic, and nearly left its white column. Out of the corners of the room swarmed the released shadows. Black specters danced in ecstasy over my bed. I love fresh air, but I cannot allow it to slay the shining and delicate body of my little friend the candle-flame, the comrade who ventures with me into the solitudes beyond midnight. I shut the window.
The rain streaked across the window at midnight like a thousand tiny feet. There was a groan in the darkness outside, the voice of all unnamed fears. The nervous candle flame flickered by my bedside. The groaning turned into a shriek, and the little flame jumped in panic, nearly escaping its white column. Shadows swarmed out from the corners of the room. Black figures danced wildly over my bed. I love fresh air, but I can't let it extinguish my little friend, the delicate candle flame, who accompanies me into the solitude beyond midnight. I shut the window.
They talk of the candle-power of an electric bulb. What do they mean? It cannot have the faintest glimmer of the real power of my candle. It would be as right to express, in the same inverted and foolish comparison, the worth of "those delicate sisters, the Pleiades." That pinch of star dust, the Pleiades, exquisitely remote in deepest night, in the profound where light all but fails, has not the power of a sulphur match; yet, still apprehensive to the mind though tremulous on the limit of vision, and sometimes even vanishing, it brings into distinction those distant and difficult hints—hidden far behind all our verified thoughts—which we rarely properly view. I should like to know of any great arc-lamp which could do that. So the star-like candle for me. No other light follows so intimately an author's most ghostly suggestion. We sit, the candle and I, in the midst of the shades we are conquering, and sometimes look up from the lucent page to contemplate the dark hosts of the enemy with a smile before they overwhelm us; as they will, of course. Like me, the candle is mortal; it will burn out.
They talk about the brightness of an electric bulb. What do they actually mean? It can’t even begin to compare to the true power of my candle. It would be just as silly to compare it to "those delicate sisters, the Pleiades." That small cluster of stardust, the Pleiades, beautifully distant in the deepest night, where light barely survives, doesn’t have the strength of a sulfur match; yet, it still captivates the mind even when it flickers at the edge of sight and sometimes disappears completely. It highlights those distant and elusive ideas—hidden far behind all our clear thoughts—which we rarely see properly. I’d like to see any powerful arc-lamp that could do that. So for me, the candle shines like a star. No other light follows an author’s most ethereal suggestion as closely. The candle and I sit together among the shadows we’re overcoming, sometimes glancing up from the glowing page to face the dark forces of opposition with a smile before they inevitably overtake us; as they surely will. Like me, the candle is finite; it will eventually burn out.
As the bed-book itself should be a sort of night-light, to assist its illumination, coarse lamps are useless. They would douse the book. The light for such a book must accord with it. It must be, like the book, a limited, personal, mellow, and companionable glow; the solitary taper beside the only worshiper in a sanctuary. That is why nothing can compare with the intimacy of candle-light for a bed-book. It is a living heart, bright and warm in central night, burning for us alone, holding the gaunt and towering shadows at bay. There the monstrous specters stand in our midnight room, the advance guard of the darkness of the world, held off by our valiant little glim, but ready to flood instantly and founder us in original gloom.
As the book you read in bed should serve as a kind of night-light, harsh lamps are ineffective. They would overpower the book. The light for such a reading must match it. It should be, like the book, a limited, personal, soft, and friendly glow; the solitary candle beside the only person in a quiet place. That’s why nothing beats the warmth of candlelight for reading in bed. It’s a living flame, bright and warm in the deep night, shining just for us, keeping the tall and looming shadows at bay. There, the frightening figures stand in our midnight space, the first line of defense against the darkness of the world, held back by our brave little light, but ready to flood in and drown us in deep gloom.
The wind moans without; ancient evils are at large and wandering in torment. The rain shrieks across the window. For a moment, for just a moment, the sentinel candle is shaken, and burns blue with terror. The shadows leap out instantly. The little flame recovers, and merely looks at its foe the darkness, and back to its own place goes the old enemy of light and man. The candle for me, tiny, mortal, warm, and brave, a golden lily on a silver stem!
The wind howls outside; ancient evils roam freely, suffering as they wander. The rain screams against the window. For just a moment, the candle flickers and burns blue with fear. The shadows leap out right away. The tiny flame steadies itself, simply facing its enemy, the darkness, and then retreats back to its own place, the old foe of light and humanity. The candle represents me, small, fragile, warm, and courageous, like a golden lily on a silver stem!
"Almost any book does for a bed-book," a woman once said to me. I nearly replied in a hurry that almost any woman would do for a wife; but that is not the way to bring people to conviction of sin. Her idea was that the bed-book is soporific, and for that reason she even advocated the reading of political speeches. That would be a dissolute act. Certainly you would go to sleep; but in what a frame of mind! You would enter into sleep with your eyes shut. It would be like dying, not only unshriven, but in the act of guilt.
"Almost any book works as a bedtime read," a woman once told me. I almost shot back that almost any woman would do as a wife; but that's not how to make people realize their wrongdoings. She believed a bedtime book should be dull, and for that reason, she even suggested reading political speeches. That would be a reckless choice. Sure, you’d fall asleep, but think about the mindset you’d be in! You’d drift off with your eyes closed, almost like dying—not just unconfessed, but in the midst of wrongdoing.
What book shall it shine upon? Think of Plato, or Dante, or Tolstoy, or a Blue Book for such an occasion! I cannot. They will not do—they are no good to me. I am not writing about you. I know those men I have named are transcendent, the greater lights. But I am bound to confess at times they bore me. Though their feet are clay and on earth, just as ours, their stellar brows are sometimes dim in remote clouds. For my part, they are too big for bed-fellows. I cannot see myself, carrying my feeble and restricted glim, following (in pajamas) the statuesque figure of the Florentine where it stalks, aloof in its garb of austere pity, the sonorous deeps of Hades. Hades! Not for me; not after midnight! Let those go who like it.
What book should it shine on? Think about Plato, or Dante, or Tolstoy, or a Blue Book for this kind of occasion! I can’t decide. They won’t work for me—they don’t help. I’m not writing about you. I know those guys I mentioned are incredible, the greater lights. But I have to admit that sometimes they bore me. Even though they’re as human as we are, their shining thoughts can sometimes feel far away. Honestly, they’re too big to cozy up to. I can’t picture myself, carrying my weak and limited light, following (in my pajamas) the impressive figure of the Florentine as it moves quietly in its outfit of serious compassion through the deep darkness of Hades. Hades! Not for me; not after midnight! Let those who enjoy it go.
As for the Russian, vast and disquieting, I refuse to leave all, including the blankets and the pillow, to follow him into the gelid tranquillity of the upper air, where even the colors are prismatic spicules of ice, to brood upon the erratic orbit of the poor mud-ball below called earth. I know it is my world also; but I cannot help that. It is too late, after a busy day, and at that hour, to begin overtime on fashioning a new and better planet out of cosmic dust. By breakfast-time, nothing useful would have been accomplished. We should all be where we were the night before. The job is far too long, once the pillow is nicely set.
As for the Russian, it's vast and unsettling; I refuse to give up everything, including the blankets and the pillow, to chase after him into the chilling calm of the upper air, where even the colors are just icy shards of light, to contemplate the unpredictable path of the poor mud-ball we call Earth. I know it's my world too, but I can't change that. It's too late, after a busy day, and at this hour, to start working overtime on creating a new and better planet from cosmic dust. By breakfast, nothing useful would have been done. We’d all just be back where we started the night before. The task is far too lengthy once the pillow is nicely set.
For the truth is, there are times when we are too weary to remain attentive and thankful under the improving eye, kindly but severe, of the seers. There are times when we do not wish to be any better than we are. We do not wish to be elevated and improved. At midnight, away with such books! As for the literary pundits, the high priests of the Temple of Letters, it is interesting and helpful occasionally for an acolyte to swinge them a good hard one with an incense-burner, and cut and run, for a change, to something outside the rubrics. Midnight is the time when one can recall, with ribald delight, the names of all the Great Works which every gentleman ought to have read, but which some of us have not. For there is almost as much clotted nonsense written about literature as there is about theology.
For the truth is, there are times when we are just too tired to stay focused and grateful under the watchful eye, kind yet strict, of the visionaries. There are moments when we don’t want to be any better than we are. We don’t want to be uplifted and improved. At midnight, forget such books! As for the literary experts, the high priests of the Temple of Letters, it's sometimes fun and useful for a novice to give them a good whack with an incense burner and then run off to something outside the rules for a change. Midnight is when you can gleefully remember the titles of all the Great Works every gentleman should have read, but some of us haven’t. Because there’s almost as much confusing nonsense written about literature as there is about theology.
There are few books which go with midnight, solitude, and a candle. It is much easier to say what does not please us then than what is exactly right. The book must be, anyhow, something benedictory by a sinning fellow-man. Cleverness would be repellent at such an hour. Cleverness, anyhow, is the level of mediocrity to-day; we are all too infernally clever. The first witty and perverse paradox blows out the candle. Only the sick in mind crave cleverness, as a morbid body turns to drink. The late candle throws its beams a great distance; and its rays make transparent much that seemed massy and important. The mind at rest beside that light, when the house is asleep, and the consequential affairs of the urgent world have diminished to their right proportions because we see them distantly from another and a more tranquil place in the heavens where duty, honor, witty arguments, controversial logic on great questions, appear such as will leave hardly a trace of fossil in the indurated mud which presently will cover them—the mind then certainly smiles at cleverness.
There are few books that fit the vibe of midnight, solitude, and a candle. It's much easier to express what we don’t like at that time than to pinpoint what feels just right. The book should, in some way, be a blessing from a flawed fellow human. Being clever would feel off at that hour. Cleverness, anyway, is just the standard today; we’re all way too smart for our own good. The first witty and twisted paradox snuffs out the candle. Only those mentally unwell seek cleverness, like a sick body turns to alcohol. The late candle casts its light far; its rays reveal much that seemed heavy and significant. The mind, at peace beside that light when the house is asleep, sees the urgent issues of the world shrink down to their true size as we view them from a more serene place above, where duty, honor, witty debates, and controversial logic on important matters seem to leave hardly a mark in the hardened ground that will eventually cover them—the mind then definitely chuckles at cleverness.
For though at that hour the body may be dog-tired, the mind is white and lucid, like that of a man from whom a fever has abated. It is bare of illusions. It has a sharp focus, small and starlike, as a clear and lonely flame left burning by the altar of a shrine from which all have gone but one. A book which approaches that light in the privacy of that place must come, as it were, with honest and open pages.
For even though the body may be exhausted at that hour, the mind is clear and alert, like someone recovering from a fever. It's free of illusions. It has a sharp focus, small and bright, like a clear and solitary flame left burning on the altar of a shrine from which everyone has left except for one person. A book that approaches that light in the privacy of that space must, in a sense, come with honest and open pages.
I like Heine then, though. His mockery of the grave and great, in those sentences which are as brave as pennants in a breeze, is comfortable and sedative. One's own secret and awkward convictions, never expressed because not lawful and because it is hard to get words to bear them lightly, seem then to be heard aloud in the mild, easy, and confident diction of an immortal whose voice has the blitheness of one who has watched, amused and irreverent, the high gods in eager and secret debate on the best way to keep the gilt and trappings on the body of the evil they have created.
I really like Heine, though. His way of laughing at serious and important things, with lines that are as bold as flags fluttering in the wind, is comforting and soothing. One's own secret and awkward beliefs, which are never shared because they aren't accepted and it's tough to express them lightly, seem to be spoken out loud in the gentle, easy, and assured style of someone immortal whose voice is cheerful, having observed the high gods with amusement and irreverence as they secretly debate the best ways to maintain the glamor and trappings on the evil they’ve brought into the world.
That first-rate explorer, Gulliver, is also fine in the light of the intimate candle. Have you read lately again his Voyage to the Houyhnhnms? Try it alone again in quiet. Swift knew all about our contemporary troubles. He has got it all down. Why was he called a misanthrope? Reading that last voyage of Gulliver in the select intimacy of midnight I am forced to wonder, not at Swift's hatred of mankind, not at his satire of his fellows, not at the strange and terrible nature of this genius who thought that much of us, but how it is that after such a wise and sorrowful revealing of the things we insist on doing, and our reasons for doing them, and what happens after we have done them, men do not change. It does seem impossible that society could remain unaltered, after the surprise its appearance should have caused it as it saw its face in that ruthless mirror. We point instead to the fact that Swift lost his mind in the end. Well, that is not a matter for surprise.
That first-rate explorer, Gulliver, also shines in the warm glow of a candle. Have you read his Voyage to the Houyhnhnms again recently? Try it alone in a quiet space. Swift knew all about our modern troubles. He captured it all. Why was he called a misanthrope? Reading that last voyage of Gulliver in the intimate stillness of midnight makes me wonder, not about Swift's disdain for humanity, not about his criticism of his peers, not about the strange and troubling nature of this genius who thought so highly of us, but how it is that after such a wise and sorrowful revelation of the things we insist on doing, our reasons for doing them, and what happens after we've done them, people do not change. It seems impossible that society could stay the same after the shock it should have felt when confronted with its own reflection in that merciless mirror. Instead, we focus on the fact that Swift eventually lost his mind. Well, that's not surprising.
Such books, and France's "Isle of Penguins," are not disturbing as bed-books. They resolve one's agitated and outraged soul, relieving it with some free expression for the accusing and questioning thoughts engendered by the day's affairs. But they do not rest immediately to hand in the book-shelf by the bed. They depend on the kind of day one has had. Sterne is closer. One would rather be transported as far as possible from all the disturbances of earth's envelope of clouds, and "Tristram Shandy" is sure to be found in the sun.
Books like these, along with France's "Isle of Penguins," aren't unsettling as bedtime reading. They calm the restless and angered spirit, offering a bit of freedom for the accusing and questioning thoughts stirred up by the day's events. However, they aren't easily accessible on the bedside shelf. Their appeal relies on how the day has gone. Sterne is more suitable. One would prefer to be taken as far away as possible from all the chaos of the world, and "Tristram Shandy" is definitely a good choice for a sunny spot.
But best of all books for midnight are travel books. Once I was lost every night for months with Doughty in the "Arabia Deserta." He is a craggy author. A long course of the ordinary facile stuff, such as one gets in the Press every day, thinking it is English, sends one thoughtless and headlong among the bitter herbs and stark boulders of Doughty's burning and spacious expanse; only to get bewildered, and the shins broken, and a great fatigue at first, in a strange land of fierce sun, hunger, glittering spar, ancient plutonic rock, and very Adam himself. But once you are acclimatized, and know the language—it takes time—there is no more London after dark, till, a wanderer returned from a forgotten land, you emerge from the interior of Arabia on the Red Sea coast again, feeling as though you had lost touch with the world you used to know. And if that doesn't mean good writing I know of no other test.
But the best books for late-night reading are travel books. I once got lost for months with Doughty in "Arabia Deserta." He's a tough writer. After a long stretch of the usual easy stuff, like what you see in the news every day, thinking it's genuine English, you find yourself thoughtlessly plunged into the harsh landscapes and stark rocks of Doughty's burning and vast desert; only to get confused, and easily stumble, and feel utterly exhausted at first, in a strange land of fierce sun, hunger, sparkling minerals, ancient volcanic rock, and even very Adam himself. But once you get used to it and learn the language—it takes time—you’ll realize there’s no more London at night, until, as a wanderer back from a forgotten place, you come out from the heart of Arabia on the Red Sea coast again, feeling like you've lost touch with the world you once knew. And if that doesn’t define good writing, I don’t know what does.
Because once there was a father whose habit it was to read with his boys nightly some chapters of the Bible—and cordially they hated that habit of his—I have that Book too; though I fear I have it for no reason that he, the rigid old faithful, would be pleased to hear about. He thought of the future when he read the Bible; I read it for the past. The familiar names, the familiar rhythm of its words, its wonderful well-remembered stories of things long past—like that of Esther, one of the best in English—the eloquent anger of the prophets for the people then who looked as though they were alive, but were really dead at heart, all is solace and home to me. And now I think of it, it is our home and solace that we want in a bed-book.
Because there was once a father who made it a habit to read some chapters of the Bible to his boys every night—and they really disliked that habit of his—I have that Book too; although I’m afraid I have it for reasons that he, the strict old believer, wouldn’t approve of. He thought about the future when he read the Bible; I read it to connect with the past. The familiar names, the rhythm of its words, its wonderful, well-remembered stories from long ago—like that of Esther, one of the best in English—the passionate anger of the prophets for the people who seemed alive but were actually dead inside, all of this brings me comfort and feels like home. And now that I think about it, it’s the comfort and sense of home that we seek in a bedtime book.
THE PRECEPT OF PEACE
By Louise Imogen Guiney
Louise Imogen Guiney (1861-1920), one of the rarest poets and most delicately poised essayists this country has reared, has been hitherto scantily appreciated by the omnipotent General Reader. Her dainty spoor is perhaps too lightly trodden upon earth to be followed by the throng. And yet one has faith in the imperishability of such a star-dust track. This lovely and profound "Precept of Peace" is peculiarly characteristic of her, and reminds one of the humorous tranquillity with which she faced the complete failure (financially speaking) of almost all her books. There was a certain sadness in learning, when the news of her death came, that many of our present-day critical Sanhedrim had never even become aware of her name.
Louise Imogen Guiney (1861-1920), one of the rarest poets and most gracefully poised essayists this country has produced, has been only slightly recognized by the powerful General Reader. Her delicate footprint is perhaps too lightly marked on the ground to be pursued by the crowd. Yet, one has faith in the lasting impact of such a star-dust trail. This beautiful and profound "Precept of Peace" is particularly representative of her work and brings to mind the humorous calm with which she faced the complete financial failure of nearly all her books. It was somewhat sad to learn, upon hearing of her death, that many members of today's literary community had never even heard her name.
There is no space, in this brief note, to do justice to her. The student will refer to the newly published memoir by her friend, Alice Brown.
There isn't enough room in this short note to do her justice. The student will refer to the newly published memoir by her friend, Alice Brown.
She was born in Boston in 1861, daughter of General Patrick Guiney who fought in the Civil War. From 1894-97 she was postmistress in Auburndale, Mass. Her later years were spent in England, mostly at Oxford: the Bodleian Library was a candle and she the ecstatic moth.
She was born in Boston in 1861, the daughter of General Patrick Guiney who fought in the Civil War. From 1894 to 1897, she served as the postmistress in Auburndale, Mass. In her later years, she lived in England, mostly in Oxford: the Bodleian Library was a candle, and she was the ecstatic moth.
A CERTAIN sort of voluntary abstraction is the oldest and choicest of social attitudes. In France, where all esthetic discoveries are made, it was crowned long ago: la sainte indifférence is, or may be, a cult, and le saint indifférent an articled practitioner. For the Gallic mind, brought up at the knee of a consistent paradox, has found that not to appear concerned about a desired good is the only method to possess it; full happiness is given, in other words, to the very man who will never sue for it. This is a secret neat as that of the Sphinx: to "go softly" among events, yet domineer them. Without fear: not because we are brave, but because we are exempt; we bear so charmed a life that not even Baldur's mistletoe can touch us to harm us. Without solicitude: for the essential thing is trained, falcon-like, to light from above upon our wrists, and it has become with us an automatic motion to open the hand, and drop what appertains to us no longer. Be it renown or a new hat, the shorter stick of celery, or
A CERTAIN type of voluntary detachment is the oldest and most valued social attitude. In France, where all aesthetic breakthroughs happen, it was recognized long ago: la sainte indifférence is, or can be, a movement, and le saint indifférent is a practiced expert. The French mind, raised on a consistent paradox, has discovered that not appearing desperate for something desirable is the only way to actually attain it; true happiness is granted, in other words, to the person who never actively seeks it. This is a secret as neat as that of the Sphinx: to "tread softly" among events while still controlling them. Without fear: not because we are courageous, but because we are untouched; we live such a charmed life that not even Baldur's mistletoe can harm us. Without worry: for the essential thing is trained, like a falcon, to land on our wrists from above, and it has become second nature for us to open our hands and let go of what no longer belongs to us. Whether it’s fame or a new hat, the shorter stick of celery, or
"The friends we had no natural right to," |
The houses that were never meant to be ours, |
it is all one: let it fall away! since only so, by depletions, can we buy serenity and a blithe mien. It is diverting to study, at the feet of Antisthenes and of Socrates his master, how many indispensables man can live without; or how many he can gather together, make over into luxuries, and so abrogate them. Thoreau somewhere expresses himself as full of divine pity for the "mover," who on May-Day clouds city streets with his melancholy household caravans: fatal impedimenta for an immortal. No: furniture is clearly a superstition. "I have little, I want nothing; all my treasure is in Minerva's tower." Not that the novice may not accumulate. Rather, let him collect beetles and Venetian interrogation-marks; if so be that he may distinguish what is truly extrinsic to him, and bestow these toys, eventually, on the children of Satan who clamor at the monastery gate. Of all his store, unconsciously increased, he can always part with sixteen-seventeenths, by way of concession to his individuality, and think the subtraction so much concealing marble chipped from the heroic figure of himself. He would be a donor from the beginning; before he can be seen to own, he will disencumber, and divide. Strange and fearful is his discovery, amid the bric-a-brac of the world, that this knowledge, or this material benefit, is for him alone. He would fain beg off from the acquisition, and shake the touch of the tangible from his imperious wings. It is not enough to cease to strive for personal favor; your true indifférent is Early Franciscan: caring not to have, he fears to hold. Things useful need never become to him things desirable. Towards all commonly-accounted sinecures, he bears the coldest front in Nature, like a magician walking a maze, and scornful of its flower-bordered detentions. "I enjoy life," says Seneca, "because I am ready to leave it." Meanwhile, they who act with too jealous respect for their morrow of civilized comfort, reap only indigestion, and crow's-foot traceries for their deluded eye-corners.
It's all the same: let it go! Because only by letting things drain away can we find peace and a cheerful attitude. It's interesting to learn, at the feet of Antisthenes and his teacher Socrates, how many essentials a person can live without; or how many they can gather, turn into luxuries, and then do away with. Thoreau once expressed his deep pity for the "mover," who on May Day fills city streets with their sad household caravans: a heavy burden for someone who is meant to be immortal. No: furniture is definitely a superstition. "I have little, I want nothing; all my treasure is in Minerva's tower." Not that someone new can't accumulate. Instead, let them collect beetles and Venetian question marks; as long as they can recognize what is truly external to them and eventually give these trinkets away to the children of Satan who call out at the monastery gate. Of all their possessions, which they unknowingly increase, they can always part with sixteen-seventeenths, as a way to honor their individuality, believing that this subtraction is like removing some marble from the heroic statue of themselves. They would start as a donor; before they can be seen as owning anything, they will lighten their load and share. It’s a strange and unsettling realization, amid the clutter of the world, that this knowledge or this material benefit is just for them. They would rather not acquire it and would like to shake the weight of the physical off their demanding wings. It’s not enough to stop seeking personal approval; a true indifferent person is like an early Franciscan: not wanting to own, they fear holding onto things. Useful items should never become things they desire. Towards all the things commonly considered unnecessary, they maintain the coldest attitude in nature, like a magician navigating a maze, looking down on its flower-adorned distractions. "I enjoy life," says Seneca, "because I am ready to leave it." Meanwhile, those who are overly protective of their comfortable, civilized future only end up with indigestion and crow's feet around their deluded eyes.
Now nothing is farther from le saint indifférent than cheap indifferentism, so-called: the sickness of sophomores. His business is to hide, not to display, his lack of interest in fripperies. It is not he who looks languid, and twiddles his thumbs for sick misplacedness, like Achilles among girls. On the contrary, he is a smiling industrious elf, monstrous attentive to the canons of polite society. In relation to others, he shows what passes for animation and enthusiasm; for at all times his character is founded on control of these qualities, not on the absence of them. It flatters his sense of superiority that he may thus pull wool about the ears of joint and several. He has so strong a will that it can be crossed and counter-crossed, as by himself, so by a dozen outsiders, without a break in his apparent phlegm. He has gone through volition, and come out at the other side of it; everything with him is a specific act: he has no habits. Le saint indifférent is a dramatic wight: he loves to refuse your proffered six per cent, when, by a little haggling, he may obtain three-and-a-half. For so he gets away with his own mental processes virgin: it is inconceivable to you that, being sane, he should so comport himself. Amiable, perhaps, only by painful propulsions and sore vigilance, let him appear the mere inheritor of easy good-nature. Unselfish out of sheer pride, and ever eager to claim the slippery side of the pavement, or the end cut of the roast (on the secret ground, be it understood, that he is not as Capuan men, who wince at trifles), let him have his ironic reward in passing for one whose physical connoisseurship is yet in the raw. That sympathy which his rule forbids his devoting to the usual objects, he expends, with some bravado, upon their opposites; for he would fain seem a decent partizan of some sort, not what he is, a bivalve intelligence, Tros Tyriusque. He is known here and there, for instance, as valorous in talk; yet he is by nature a solitary, and, for the most part, somewhat less communicative than
Now nothing is further from the indifferent saint than cheap indifference, the kind you see in inexperienced individuals. His role is to conceal, not showcase, his lack of concern for trivial matters. He doesn't look bored or twiddle his thumbs in a state of awkwardness like Achilles among women. Instead, he is a cheerful, diligent personality, extremely attentive to the standards of polite society. When interacting with others, he presents what seems like energy and enthusiasm; however, his character is grounded in controlling these traits rather than lacking them. It flatters his sense of superiority that he can deceive people easily. His will is so strong that it can be challenged by himself and others without ever showing a crack in his façade. He has gone through the process of decision-making and emerged on the other side; everything he does is a deliberate action: he has no routines. The indifferent saint is a theatrical figure: he loves to reject your offered six percent when, with a little negotiation, he could get three and a half. This way, he keeps his own mental processes untouched; it seems unbelievable to you that someone sane would act this way. Maybe he appears friendly only because of painful effort and constant vigilance, letting himself seem like someone who easily inherits good-naturedness. Altruistic out of sheer pride and always ready to claim the edge of the sidewalk or the best-cut piece of meat (with the secret understanding that he is not like those men in Capua, who flinch at minor inconveniences), let him earn his ironic reward by being perceived as someone whose taste is still developmental. The empathy that his principles prevent him from directing toward typical causes, he channels, with a touch of bravado, toward their opposites; for he wants to appear as a loyal supporter of a cause, not what he really is, a superficial thinker, Tros Tyriusque. He is occasionally recognized as a brave conversationalist; yet, by nature, he is solitary and generally less communicative than
"The wind that sings to itself as it moves along, |
Lonely and awful, at the height of the Andes. |
Imagining nothing idler than words in the face of grave events, he condoles and congratulates with the genteelest air in the world. In short, while there is anything expected of him, while there are spectators to be fooled, the stratagems of the fellow prove inexhaustible. It is only when he is quite alone that he drops his jaw, and stretches his legs; then heigho! arises like a smoke, and envelopes him becomingly, the beautiful native well-bred torpidity of the gods, of poetic boredom, of "the Oxford manner."
Imagining nothing more pointless than words in the face of serious events, he offers his condolences and congratulations with the most refined demeanor imaginable. In short, as long as there’s something expected of him, and an audience to impress, his tricks are endless. It’s only when he’s completely alone that he lets his guard down, slumps, and stretches out; then, whoosh! he disappears like smoke, wrapping himself in the elegant, natural laziness of the gods, that poetic boredom, that "Oxford manner."
"How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable!" sighed Hamlet of this mortal outlook. As it came from him in the beginning, that plaint, in its sincerity, can come only from the man of culture, who feels about him vast mental spaces and depths, and to whom the face of creation is but comparative and symbolic. Nor will he breathe it in the common ear, where it may woo misapprehensions, and breed ignorant rebellion. The unlettered must ever love or hate what is nearest him, and, for lack of perspective, think his own fist the size of the sun. The social prizes, which, with mellowed observers, rank as twelfth or thirteenth in order of desirability, such as wealth and a foothold in affairs, seem to him first and sole; and to them he clings like a barnacle. But to our indifférent, nothing is so vulgar as close suction. He will never tighten his fingers on loaned opportunity; he is a gentleman, the hero of the habitually relaxed grasp. A light unprejudiced hold on his profits strikes him as decent and comely, though his true artistic pleasure is still in "fallings from us, vanishings." It costs him little to loose and to forego, to unlace his tentacles, and from the many who push hard behind, to retire, as it were, on a never-guessed-at competency, "richer than untempted kings." He would not be a life-prisoner, in ever so charming a bower. While the tranquil Sabine Farm is his delight, well he knows that on the dark trail ahead of him, even Sabine Farms are not sequacious. Thus he learns betimes to play the guest under his own cedars, and, with disciplinary intent, goes often from them; and, hearing his heart-strings snap the third night he is away, rejoices that he is again a freedman. Where his foot is planted (though it root not anywhere), he calls that spot home. No Unitarian in locality, it follows that he is the best of travelers, tangential merely, and pleased with each new vista of the human Past. He sometimes wishes his understanding less, that he might itch deliciously with a prejudice. With cosmic congruities, great and general forces, he keeps, all along, a tacit understanding, such as one has with beloved relatives at a distance; and his finger, airily inserted in his outer pocket, is really upon the pulse of eternity. His vocation, however, is to bury himself in the minor and immediate task; and from his intent manner, he gets confounded, promptly and permanently, with the victims of commercial ambition.
"How tired, dull, lifeless, and pointless!" sighed Hamlet about this mortal view. Since it came from him at first, that lament, with its honesty, can only come from a cultured man who perceives vast mental expanses and depths around him, and to whom the world is merely comparative and symbolic. He won’t utter it in public where it could lead to misunderstandings and inspire ignorant rebellion. Uneducated people must always love or hate what is closest to them, and lacking perspective, think their own fist is as big as the sun. The social rewards that, to seasoned observers, rank as twelfth or thirteenth in desirability, like wealth and a position in society, appear to him as the first and only priorities, and he clings to them like a barnacle. But to our indifferent individual, nothing is as tacky as desperate attachment. He will never grip tightly onto borrowed opportunities; he is a gentleman, the hero of a relaxed hold. A light, unbiased grip on his gains seems decent and attractive to him, although his true artistic enjoyment lies in "losing ourselves, vanishing." It costs him little to let go, to release his grasp, and to step back from those who are pushing hard behind him, retreating to a hidden wealth, "richer than untempted kings." He wouldn’t want to be a lifelong prisoner, even in the most beautiful setting. While the peaceful Sabine Farm delights him, he knows well that, on the dark road ahead, even Sabine Farms will not be his constant. Thus, he learns early to play the guest under his own cedar trees, and, with a sense of discipline, often steps away from them; and when he hears his heartstrings snap the third night he’s gone, he rejoices that he is once again free. Wherever he plants his feet (even if it doesn’t anchor him anywhere), he calls that place home. As a local Unitarian, he is, therefore, the best of travelers, merely tangential, pleased with each new view of human history. Sometimes he wishes he understood less so he could delight in a delicious prejudice. With universal truths and greater forces, he maintains a silent connection, like one has with beloved relatives from afar; and with his finger playfully in his outer pocket, he’s actually in touch with the pulse of eternity. However, his calling is to immerse himself in the smaller and more immediate tasks; and from his serious demeanor, he quickly gets confused with the victims of commercial ambition.
The true use of the much-praised Lucius Cary, Viscount Falkland, has hardly been apprehended: he is simply the patron saint of indifférents. From first to last, almost alone in that discordant time, he seems to have heard far-off resolving harmonies, and to have been rapt away with foreknowledge. Battle, to which all knights were bred, was penitential to him. It was but a childish means: and to what end? He meanwhile—and no man carried his will in better abeyance to the scheme of the universe—wanted no diligence in camp or council. Cares sat handsomely on him who cared not at all, who won small comfort from the cause which his conscience finally espoused. He labored to be a doer, to stand well with observers; and none save his intimate friends read his agitation and profound weariness. "I am so much taken notice of," he writes, "for an impatient desire for peace, that it is necessary I should likewise make it appear how it is not out of fear for the utmost hazard of war." And so, driven from the ardor he had to the simulation of the ardor he lacked, loyally daring, a sacrifice to one of two transient opinions, and inly impartial as a star, Lord Falkland fell: the young never-to-be-forgotten martyr of Newburg field. The imminent deed he made a work of art; and the station of the moment the only post of honor. Life and death may be all one to such a man: but he will at least take the noblest pains to discriminate between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, if he has to write a book about the variations of their antennæ. And like the Carolian exemplar is the disciple. The indifférent is a good thinker, or a good fighter. He is no "immartial minion," as dear old Chapman suffers Hector to call Tydides. Nevertheless, his sign-manual is content with humble and stagnant conditions. Talk of scaling the Himalayas of life affects him, very palpably, as "tall talk." He deals not with things, but with the impressions and analogies of things. The material counts for nothing with him: he has moulted it away. Not so sure of the identity of the higher course of action as he is of his consecrating dispositions, he feels that he may make heaven again, out of sundries, as he goes. Shall not a beggarly duty, discharged with perfect temper, land him in "the out-courts of Glory," quite as successfully as a grand Sunday-school excursion to front the cruel Paynim foe? He thinks so. Experts have thought so before him. Francis Drake, with the national alarum instant in his ears, desired first to win at bowls, on the Devon sward, "and afterwards to settle with the Don." No one will claim a buccaneering hero for an indifférent, however. The Jesuit novices were ball-playing almost at that very time, three hundred years ago, when some too speculative companion, figuring the end of the world in a few moments (with just leisure enough, between, to be shriven in chapel, according to his own thrifty mind), asked Louis of Gonzaga how he, on his part, should employ the precious interval. "I should go on with the game," said the most innocent and most ascetic youth among them. But to cite the behavior of any of the saints is to step over the playful line allotted. Indifference of the mundane brand is not to be confounded with their detachment, which is emancipation wrought in the soul, and the ineffable efflorescence of the Christian spirit. Like most supernatural virtues, it has a laic shadow; the counsel to abstain, and to be unsolicitous, is one not only of perfection, but also of polity. A very little nonadhesion to common affairs, a little reserve of unconcern, and the gay spirit of sacrifice, provide the moral immunity which is the only real estate. The indifférent believes in storms: since tales of shipwreck encompass him. But once among his own kind, he wonders that folk should be circumvented by merely extraneous powers! His favorite catch, woven in among escaped dangers, rises through the roughest weather, and daunts it:
The true role of the much-praised Lucius Cary, Viscount Falkland, has hardly been understood: he is basically the patron saint of the indifferent. From start to finish, almost alone in that chaotic time, he seems to have heard distant resolving harmonies and been caught up in foreknowledge. Battle, to which all knights were trained, felt penitential to him. It was just a childish means: and for what purpose? He, meanwhile—and no one better balanced their will with the scheme of the universe—desired no effort in camp or council. Concerns looked good on him who cared not at all, who found little comfort in the cause his conscience eventually supported. He tried to be a doer, to appear favorable to onlookers; yet only his close friends noticed his agitation and deep fatigue. "I am so often noticed," he writes, "for my impatient desire for peace, that I must also show how it is not out of fear of the worst dangers of war." And so, pushed from the enthusiasm he had to the pretense of the enthusiasm he lacked, bravely loyal, a sacrifice to one of two fleeting opinions, and inwardly unbiased like a star, Lord Falkland fell: the young and unforgettable martyr of Newburg field. The imminent act became a work of art; and the significance of the moment, the only position of honor. Life and death may be the same to such a man: but he will at least go to great lengths to distinguish between Tweedledum and Tweedledee if he has to write a book about the variations of their antennas. And like the Carolian example is the disciple. The indifferent is a good thinker or a good fighter. He is no "immartial minion," as dear old Chapman lets Hector call Tydides. Nevertheless, his signature is satisfied with humble and stagnant conditions. Talking about scaling the Himalayas of life clearly affects him as "tall talk." He doesn't deal with things, but with the impressions and analogies of things. The material means nothing to him: he has shed it away. Not as certain of the higher course of action as he is of his consecrating dispositions, he feels that he can recreate heaven from various elements as he goes. Isn't a petty duty, performed with perfect grace, enough to land him in "the out-courts of Glory," just as successfully as a grand Sunday-school trip to confront the cruel Paynim foe? He thinks so. Experts have thought so before him. Francis Drake, with the national alarm ringing in his ears, first wanted to win at bowls on the Devon grass, "and then settle with the Don." No one would label a swashbuckling hero as indifferent, though. The Jesuit novices were playing ball almost at that very moment, three hundred years ago, when some overly speculative companion, imagining the end of the world was near (with just enough time in between to be absolved in chapel, according to his own thrift), asked Louis of Gonzaga how he should spend the precious interval. "I would keep playing," said the most innocent and ascetic youth among them. But to reference the conduct of any of the saints is to step outside the playful boundaries set. Mundane indifference should not be confused with their detachment, which is emancipation wrought in the soul, and the indescribable flowering of the Christian spirit. Like most supernatural virtues, it has a worldly shadow; the advice to abstain, and to be unconcerned, is one not only of perfection but also of policy. A little non-involvement in common affairs, a little reserve of indifference, and the cheerful spirit of sacrifice provide the moral immunity that is the only real estate. The indifferent believes in storms: since tales of shipwreck surround him. But once among his own kind, he wonders how people can be affected by simply external forces! His favorite refrain, intertwined with escaped dangers, rises through the roughest weather and challenges it:
"Now lower your sails, you cheerful sailors, |
For we have come into a quiet road. |
No slave to any vicissitude, his imagination is, on the contrary, the cheerful obstinate tyrant of all that is. He lives, as Keats once said of himself, "in a thousand worlds," withdrawing at will from one to another, often curtailing his circumference to enlarge his liberty. His universe is a universe of balls, like those which the cunning Oriental carvers make out of ivory; each entire surface perforated with the same delicate pattern, each moving prettily and inextricably within the other, and all but the outer one impossible to handle. In some such innermost asylum the right sort of dare-devil sits smiling, while men rage or weep.
No longer swayed by life's ups and downs, his imagination is, instead, the cheerful and stubborn ruler of everything that exists. He lives, as Keats once said about himself, "in a thousand worlds," moving freely from one to another, often narrowing his focus to expand his freedom. His universe is like a set of intricately carved ivory balls; each ball covered with the same delicate design, each one beautifully and intricately contained within the other, making all but the outer one impossible to touch. In some deep inner refuge, the right kind of daredevil sits with a smile, while others rage or cry.
ON LYING AWAKE AT NIGHT
By Stewart Edward White
This is from The Forest—one of Stewart Edward White's many delightful volumes. A very large public has enjoyed Mr. White's writings—many of his readers, perhaps, without accurately realizing how extraordinarily good they are.
This is from The Forest—one of Stewart Edward White's numerous enjoyable books. A huge audience has appreciated Mr. White's writing—many of his readers, perhaps, without fully recognizing just how remarkably good they are.
Mr. White was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1873; studied at the University of Michigan; has hunted big game in Africa; served as major of field artillery, 1917-18; and is a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society. His first book, The Westerners, was published in 1901, since when they have followed regularly.
Mr. White was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan, in 1873; studied at the University of Michigan; has hunted big game in Africa; served as a major in field artillery from 1917 to 1918; and is a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society. His first book, The Westerners, was published in 1901, and since then, he has published regularly.
"Who hath lain alone to hear the wild goose cry?"
"Who has been alone to listen to the wild goose cry?"
ABOUT once in so often you are due to lie awake at night. Why this is so I have never been able to discover. It apparently comes from no predisposing uneasiness of indigestion, no rashness in the matter of too much tea or tobacco, no excitation of unusual incident or stimulating conversation. In fact, you turn in with the expectation of rather a good night's rest. Almost at once the little noises of the forest grow larger, blend in the hollow bigness of the first drowse; your thoughts drift idly back and forth between reality and dream; when—snap!—you are broad awake!
ABOUT once in a while, you find yourself lying awake at night. I've never figured out why this happens. It doesn’t seem to come from any upset stomach, overindulgence in tea or tobacco, or excitement from something unusual or a lively conversation. In fact, you go to bed expecting to have a good night's sleep. Almost immediately, the little sounds of the forest become louder, mixing into the deep stillness of your first drowsiness; your thoughts drift lazily between reality and dreams; when—snap!—you’re wide awake!
For, unlike mere insomnia, lying awake at night in the woods is pleasant. The eager, nervous straining for sleep gives way to a delicious indifference. You do not care. Your mind is cradled in an exquisite poppy-suspension of judgment and of thought. Impressions slip vaguely into your consciousness and as vaguely out again. Sometimes they stand stark and naked for your inspection; sometimes they lose themselves in the mist of half-sleep. Always they lay soft velvet fingers on the drowsy imagination, so that in their caressing you feel the vaster spaces from which they have come. Peaceful-brooding your faculties receive. Hearing, sight, smell—all are preternaturally keen to whatever of sound and sight and woods perfume is abroad through the night; and yet at the same time active appreciation dozes, so these things lie on it sweet and cloying like fallen rose-leaves.
Because, unlike just having insomnia, lying awake at night in the woods is actually enjoyable. The anxious, restless struggle to sleep fades into a delightful apathy. You stop caring. Your mind is held in a beautiful state where judgment and thought are suspended. Impressions drift softly into your awareness and just as softly out again. Sometimes they appear clear and exposed for you to examine; other times they fade away in the haze of half-sleep. They always touch your dreamy imagination with soft, velvet-like fingers, making you feel the vast spaces from which they originated. Your senses are peacefully attuned. Hearing, sight, smell—all become incredibly sharp to any sounds, sights, and the earthy scents floating through the night; yet at the same time, your active appreciation drowsily fades, making these sensations feel sweet and heavy like fallen rose petals.
In such circumstance you will hear what the voyageurs call the voices of the rapids. Many people never hear them at all. They speak very soft and low and distinct beneath the steady roar and dashing, beneath even the lesser tinklings and gurglings whose quality superimposes them over the louder sounds. They are like the tear-forms swimming across the field of vision, which disappear so quickly when you concentrate your sight to look at them, and which reappear so magically when again your gaze turns vacant. In the stillness of your hazy half-consciousness they speak; when you bend your attention to listen, they are gone, and only the tumults and the tinklings remain.
In such circumstances, you'll hear what the voyageurs refer to as the voices of the rapids. Many people never hear them at all. They speak very softly, quietly, and clearly beneath the constant roar and rush, even beneath the softer sounds that blend over the louder ones. They’re like fleeting images swimming across your field of vision that vanish so quickly when you try to focus on them, but magically reappear when your gaze drifts. In the stillness of your hazy half-awareness, they speak; but when you try to listen intently, they disappear, leaving only the chaos and the gentle sounds behind.
But in the moments of their audibility they are very distinct. Just as often an odor will wake all a vanished memory, so these voices, by the force of a large impressionism, suggest whole scenes. Far off are the cling-clang-cling of chimes and the swell-and-fall murmur of a multitude en fête, so that subtly you feel the gray old town, with its walls, the crowded market-place, the decent peasant crowd, the booths, the mellow church building with its bells, the warm, dust-moted sun. Or, in the pauses between the swish-dash-dashings of the waters, sound faint and clear voices singing intermittently, calls, distant notes of laughter, as though many canoes were working against the current—only the flotilla never gets any nearer, nor the voices louder. The voyageurs call these mist people the Huntsmen; and look frightened. To each is his vision, according to his experience. The nations of the earth whisper to their exiled sons through the voices of the rapids. Curiously enough, by all reports, they suggest always peaceful scenes—a harvest-field, a street fair, a Sunday morning in a cathedral town, careless travelers—never the turmoils and struggles. Perhaps this is the great Mother's compensation in a harsh mode of life.
But in the moments when they can be heard, they are very clear. Just like an odor can bring back a forgotten memory, these voices, through a powerful impression, suggest entire scenes. Far away, you can hear the cling-clang of chimes and the gentle murmur of a crowd celebrating, making you subtly sense the gray old town with its walls, the bustling marketplace, the respectable peasant crowd, the booths, the warm church building with its bells, and the warm, dusty sunlight. Or, in the quiet moments between the rush of the water, you hear faint and clear voices singing intermittently, calls, distant laughter, as if many canoeists are paddling upstream—yet the flotilla never gets any closer, nor do the voices get louder. The travelers call these misty figures the Huntsmen and look scared. Each person's vision reflects their experiences. The nations of the world whisper to their exiled children through the voices of the rapids. Oddly enough, by all accounts, they always suggest peaceful scenes—a harvest field, a street fair, a Sunday morning in a cathedral town, carefree travelers—never the chaos and struggles. Maybe this is the great Mother’s way of compensating for a harsh life.
Nothing is more fantastically unreal to tell about, nothing more concretely real to experience, than this undernote of the quick water. And when you do lie awake at night, it is always making its unobtrusive appeal. Gradually its hypnotic spell works. The distant chimes ring louder and nearer as you cross the borderland of sleep. And then outside the tent some little woods noise snaps the thread. An owl hoots, a whippoorwill cries, a twig cracks beneath the cautious prowl of some night creature—at once the yellow sunlit French meadows puff away—you are staring at the blurred image of the moon spraying through the texture of your tent.
Nothing feels more unreal to talk about and yet more real to experience than the soft sound of the flowing water. And when you lie awake at night, it’s always subtly calling to you. Gradually, its hypnotic effect takes hold. The distant chimes grow louder and closer as you drift into sleep. Then outside the tent, a small noise from the woods breaks the spell. An owl hoots, a whippoorwill calls, a twig snaps under the careful movement of some night creature—suddenly the bright, sunlit French meadows fade away—you find yourself staring at the blurred image of the moon filtering through the fabric of your tent.
The voices of the rapids have dropped into the background, as have the dashing noises of the stream. Through the forest is a great silence, but no stillness at all. The whippoorwill swings down and up the short curve of his regular song; over and over an owl says his rapid whoo, whoo, whoo. These, with the ceaseless dash of the rapids, are the web on which the night traces her more delicate embroideries of the unexpected. Distant crashes, single and impressive; stealthy footsteps near at hand; the subdued scratching of claws; a faint sniff! sniff! sniff! of inquiry; the sudden clear tin-horn ko-ko-ko-óh of the little owl; the mournful, long-drawn-out cry of the loon, instinct with the spirit of loneliness; the ethereal call-note of the birds of passage high in the air; a patter, patter, patter, among the dead leaves, immediately stilled; and then at the last, from the thicket close at hand, the beautiful silver purity of the white-throated sparrow—the nightingale of the North—trembling with the ecstasy of beauty, as though a shimmering moonbeam had turned to sound; and all the while the blurred figure of the moon mounting to the ridge-line of your tent—these things combine subtly, until at last the great Silence of which they are a part overarches the night and draws you forth to contemplation.
The sounds of the rapids have faded into the background, just like the rushing noise of the stream. There's a deep silence in the forest, but it's not completely still. The whippoorwill moves up and down the curve of its familiar song; again and again, an owl hoots its quick whoo, whoo, whoo. These, along with the constant rush of the rapids, create a backdrop for the night to weave its finer patterns of the unexpected. Distant crashes, striking and memorable; quiet footsteps close by; the soft scratching of claws; a faint sniff! sniff! sniff! of curiosity; the sudden clear ko-ko-ko-óh of a little owl; the mournful, drawn-out call of the loon, infused with a sense of loneliness; the ethereal notes of migratory birds high above; a patter, patter, patter among the fallen leaves, suddenly silenced; and then lastly, from a nearby thicket, the pure, beautiful sound of the white-throated sparrow—the nightingale of the North—trembling with the joy of beauty, as if a shimmering moonbeam had become a sound; and all the while, the blurred shape of the moon rises along the ridge of your tent—these elements blend together, until the profound Silence they embody envelops the night and invites you to reflect.
No beverage is more grateful than the cup of spring water you drink at such a time; no moment more refreshing than that in which you look about you at the darkened forest. You have cast from you with the warm blanket the drowsiness of dreams. A coolness, physical and spiritual, bathes you from head to foot. All your senses are keyed to the last vibrations. You hear the littler night prowlers; you glimpse the greater. A faint, searching woods perfume of dampness greets your nostrils. And somehow, mysteriously, in a manner not to be understood, the forces of the world seem in suspense, as though a touch might crystallize infinite possibilities into infinite power and motion. But the touch lacks. The forces hover on the edge of action, unheeding the little noises. In all humbleness and awe, you are a dweller of the Silent Places.
No drink is more satisfying than the cup of spring water you enjoy at this moment; no time feels more rejuvenating than when you take in the dark forest around you. You’ve tossed aside the warm blanket and shaken off the drowsiness of dreams. A refreshing coolness, both physical and spiritual, envelops you completely. All your senses are attuned to the lingering sounds. You hear the small night creatures and catch sight of the larger ones. A faint, earthy scent of dampness fills the air. And somehow, in a way that can’t be fully understood, it feels like the forces of the world are in a state of suspense, as if a single touch could transform endless possibilities into boundless energy and movement. But the touch is missing. The forces linger on the edge of action, unmindful of the small sounds. With a sense of humility and wonder, you find yourself in the Silent Places.
At such a time you will meet with adventures. One night we put fourteen inquisitive porcupines out of camp. Near McGregor's Bay I discovered in the large grass park of my camp-site nine deer, cropping the herbage like so many beautiful ghosts. A friend tells me of a fawn that every night used to sleep outside his tent and within a foot of his head, probably by way of protection against wolves. Its mother had in all likelihood been killed. The instant my friend moved toward the tent opening the little creature would disappear, and it was always gone by earliest daylight. Nocturnal bears in search of pork are not uncommon. But even though your interest meets nothing but the bats and the woods shadows and the stars, that few moments of the sleeping world forces is a psychical experience to be gained in no other way. You cannot know the night by sitting up; she will sit up with you. Only by coming into her presence from the borders of sleep can you meet her face to face in her intimate mood.
At that time, you’ll have some adventures. One night, we set fourteen curious porcupines away from our camp. Near McGregor’s Bay, I found nine deer in the large grassy area of my campsite, grazing like lovely ghosts. A friend shared a story about a fawn that used to sleep outside his tent every night, just a foot from his head, probably to stay safe from wolves. Its mother had likely been killed. As soon as my friend moved toward the tent opening, the little creature would vanish, and it was always gone by dawn. It’s not uncommon to encounter bears wandering around looking for food. But even if your only company is the bats, shadows in the woods, and stars, those few moments spent in the sleeping world offer an experience you can't get any other way. You can’t understand the night by just staying awake; she’ll stay awake with you. You can only truly meet her in her intimate mood by drifting in from the edges of sleep.
The night wind from the river, or from the open spaces of the wilds, chills you after a time. You begin to think of your blankets. In a few moments you roll yourself in their soft wool. Instantly it is morning.
The night breeze from the river or the open fields outside starts to chill you after a while. You begin to crave your blankets. In just a moment, you wrap yourself in their soft wool. Suddenly, it’s morning.
And, strange to say, you have not to pay by going through the day unrefreshed. You may feel like turning in at eight instead of nine, and you may fall asleep with unusual promptitude, but your journey will begin clear-headedly, proceed springily, and end with much in reserve. No languor, no dull headache, no exhaustion, follows your experience. For this once your two hours of sleep have been as effective as nine.
And, oddly enough, you don’t have to go through the day feeling tired. You might feel like going to bed at eight instead of nine, and you might fall asleep quickly, but your day will start with a clear head, carry on with energy, and end with plenty left in the tank. There’s no sluggishness, no annoying headache, and no fatigue after this experience. For this time, your two hours of sleep have been just as effective as nine.
A WOODLAND VALENTINE
By Marian Storm
Marian Storm was born in Stormville, N. Y., and educated at Penn Hall, Chambersburg, Pa., and at Smith College. She did editorial and free-lance work in New York after graduation, and later went to Washington to become private secretary to the Argentine Ambassador. Since 1918 she has been connected with the New York Evening Post.
Marian Storm was born in Stormville, NY, and educated at Penn Hall in Chambersburg, PA, and at Smith College. After graduating, she did editorial and freelance work in New York and later moved to Washington to become the private secretary to the Argentine Ambassador. Since 1918, she has been associated with the New York Evening Post.
This essay comes from Minstrel Weather, a series of open-air vignettes which circle the zodiac with the attentive eye of a naturalist and the enchanted ardor of a poet.
This essay comes from Minstrel Weather, a series of outdoor vignettes that go through the zodiac with the careful observation of a naturalist and the passionate enthusiasm of a poet.
FORCES astir in the deepest roots grow restless beneath the lock of frost. Bulbs try the door. February's stillness is charged with a faint anxiety, as if the powers of light, pressing up from the earth's center and streaming down from the stronger sun, had troubled the buried seeds, who strive to answer their liberator, so that the guarding mother must whisper over and over, "Not yet, not yet!" Better to stay behind the frozen gate than to come too early up into realms where the wolves of cold are still aprowl. Wisely the snow places a white hand over eager life unseen, but perceived in February's woods as a swimmer feels the changing moods of water in a lake fed by springs. Only the thick stars, closer and more companionable than in months of foliage, burn alert and serene. In February the Milky Way is revealed divinely lucent to lonely peoples—herdsmen, mountaineers, fishermen, trappers—who are abroad in the starlight hours of this grave and silent time of year. It is in the long, frozen nights that the sky has most red flowers.
FORCES stirring in the deepest roots grow restless beneath the frost. Bulbs test their boundaries. February’s stillness is filled with a subtle anxiety, as if the forces of light, pushing up from the earth’s core and streaming down from the stronger sun, have disturbed the buried seeds, who struggle to respond to their liberator, causing the protective mother to whisper repeatedly, "Not yet, not yet!" It’s better to stay behind the frozen gate than to emerge too early into realms where the cold wolves still prowl. Wisely, the snow places a white hand over eager life that remains unseen, yet felt in February’s woods like a swimmer sensing the changing moods of water in a spring-fed lake. Only the thick stars, closer and more welcoming than in the months of leaves, burn bright and calm. In February, the Milky Way is revealed divinely bright to lonely individuals—herdsmen, mountaineers, fishermen, trappers—who are out in the starlit hours of this solemn and quiet time of year. It is during the long, frozen nights that the sky has the most red flowers.
February knows the beat of twilight wings. Drifting north again come birds who only pretended to forsake us—adventurers, not so fond of safety but that they dare risk finding how snow bunting and pine finch have plundered the cones of the evergreens, while chickadees, sparrows, and crows are supervising from established stations all the more domestic supplies available, a sparrow often making it possible to annoy even a duck out of her share of cracked corn. Ranged along a brown-draped oak branch in the waxing light, crows show a lordly glistening of feathers. (Sun on a sweeping wing in flight has the quality of sun on a ripple.) Where hemlocks gather, deep in somber woods, the great horned owl has thus soon, perhaps working amid snows at her task, built a nest wherein March will find sturdy balls of fluff. The thunderous love song of her mate sounds through the timber. By the time the wren has nested these winter babies will be solemn with the wisdom of their famous race.
February feels the rhythm of twilight wings. Birds that we thought had left us return, drifting north again—adventurers who aren’t too keen on safety but are daring enough to discover how the snow bunting and pine finch have raided the cones of the evergreens. Meanwhile, chickadees, sparrows, and crows are keeping an eye on the more domesticated food sources, with a sparrow often managing to annoy even a duck out of her share of cracked corn. Sitting along a brown-covered oak branch in the growing light, crows display a regal shine to their feathers. (Sunlight glistening on a bird's wing in flight resembles sunlight on a ripple.) Where hemlocks cluster deep in the shadowy woods, the great horned owl has likely already built a nest, perhaps working through the snow on her task, where March will find sturdy little bundles of fluff. The booming love call of her mate echoes through the trees. By the time the wren has nested, these winter babies will be wise beyond their years.
There is no season like the end of February for cleaning out brooks. Hastening yellow waters toss a dreary wreckage of torn or ashen leaves, twigs, acorn cups, stranded rafts of bark, and buttonballs from the sycamore, never to come to seed. Standing on one bank or both, according to the sundering flood's ambition, the knight with staff and bold forefinger sets the water princess free. She goes then curtsying and dimpling over the shining gravel, sliding from beneath the ice that roofs her on the uplands down to the softer valleys, where her quickened step will be heard by the frogs in their mansions of mud, and the fish, recluses in rayless pools, will rise to the light she brings.
There’s no time like the end of February for clearing out streams. Fast-moving yellow waters bring a sad mix of torn or gray leaves, twigs, acorn cups, stranded clusters of bark, and buttonballs from the sycamore that will never seed. Whether standing on one bank or both, depending on how ambitious the flood is, the knight with his staff and pointed finger sets the water princess free. She then curtsies and dances over the sparkling gravel, sliding out from under the ice that kept her in the higher ground down to the softer valleys, where the frogs in their mud homes will hear her lively steps, and the fish, hiding in dark pools, will rise to the light she brings.
Down from the frozen mountains, in summer, birds and winds must bear the seed of alpine flowers—lilies that lean against unmelting snows, poppies, bright-colored herbs, and the palely gleaming, fringed beauties that change names with countries. How just and reasonable it would seem to be that flowers which edge the ice in July should consent to bloom in lowlands no colder in February! The pageant of blue, magenta, and scarlet on the austere upper slopes of the Rockies, where nights are bitter to the summer wanderer—why should it not flourish to leeward of a valley barn in months when icicles hang from the eaves in this tamer setting? But no. Mountain tempests are endurable to the silken-petaled. The treacherous lowland winter, with its coaxing suns followed by roaring desolation, is for blooms bred in a different tradition.
Down from the frozen mountains, in summer, birds and winds must carry the seeds of alpine flowers—lilies that lean against unmelting snows, poppies, vibrant herbs, and the softly shining, fringed beauties that change names with different countries. It seems so fair and logical that flowers which border the ice in July should be willing to bloom in lowlands that are no colder in February! The display of blue, magenta, and scarlet on the stark upper slopes of the Rockies, where nights are harsh for summer travelers—why shouldn't it thrive on the leeward side of a valley barn during months when icicles hang from the eaves in this milder setting? But no. Mountain storms can be tolerated by those with silk-like petals. The deceptive lowland winter, with its tempting suns followed by roaring desolation, is meant for blooms raised in a completely different tradition.
The light is clear but hesitant, a delicate wine, by no means the mighty vintage of April. February has no intoxication; the vague eagerness that gives the air a pulse where fields lie voiceless comes from the secret stirring of imprisoned life. Spring and sunrise are forever miracles, but the early hour of the wonder hardly hints the exuberance of its fulfilment. Even the forest dwellers move gravely, thankful for any promise of kindness from the lord of day as he hangs above a sea-gray landscape, but knowing well that their long duress is not yet to end. Deer pathetically haunt the outskirts of farms, gazing upon cattle feeding in winter pasture from the stack, and often, after dark, clearing the fences and robbing the same disheveled storehouse. Not a chipmunk winks from the top rail. The woodchuck, after his single expeditionary effort on Candlemas, which he is obliged to make for mankind's enlightenment, has retired without being seen, in sunshine or shadow, and has not the slightest intention of disturbing himself just yet. Though snowdrops may feel uneasy, he knows too much about the Ides of March! Quietest of all Northern woods creatures, the otter slides from one ice-hung waterfall to the next. The solitary scamperer left is the cottontail, appealing because he is the most pursued and politest of the furry; faithfully trying to give no offense, except when starvation points to winter cabbage, he is none the less fey. So is the mink, though he moves like a phantom.
The light is bright but uncertain, like a delicate wine, definitely not the powerful flavor of April. February offers no intoxication; the vague anticipation that gives the air a pulse where fields lie still comes from the hidden stirring of trapped life. Spring and sunrise are always amazing, but the early hour of this wonder barely suggests the joy of its fulfillment. Even the forest animals move solemnly, grateful for any hint of kindness from the sun as it hangs above a gray landscape, yet aware that their long struggle isn't over yet. Deer sadly roam the edges of farms, watching the cattle grazing in the winter pasture from a distance, and often, after dark, they jump the fences and steal from the same messy storehouse. Not a chipmunk is seen on the top rail. The woodchuck, after his one required outing on Candlemas, which he has to do for humanity's sake, has retreated without being spotted, in sunshine or shade, and has no intention of stirring just yet. Though snowdrops might feel anxious, he knows too much about the Ides of March! The quietest of all Northern forest creatures, the otter slides from one ice-covered waterfall to the next. The only one left scurrying around is the cottontail, endearing because he is the most chased and polite of the furry creatures; he faithfully tries to cause no trouble, except when hunger drives him to the winter cabbage, yet he is still a bit quirky. The same goes for the mink, though he moves like a ghost.
Mosses, whereon March in coming treads first, show one hue brighter in the swamps. Pussy willows have made a gray dawn in viny caverns where the day's own dawn looks in but faintly, and the flushing of the red willow betrays reveries of a not impossible cowslip upon the bank beneath. The blue jay has mentioned it in the course of his voluble recollections. He is unwilling to prophesy arbutus, but he will just hint that when the leaves in the wood lot show through snow as early as this.... Once he found a hepatica bud the last day of February.... Speaking with his old friend, the muskrat, last week.... And when you can see red pebbles in the creek at five o'clock in the afternoon.... But it is no use to expect yellow orchids on the west knoll this spring, for some people found them there last year, and after that you might as well.... Of course cowslips beside red willows are remarkably pretty, just as blue jays in a cedar with blue berries.... He is interminable, but then he has seen a great deal of life. And February needs her blue jays' unwearied and conquering faith.
Mosses, where March first steps in, show a brighter hue in the swamps. Pussy willows have created a gray dawn in tangled spaces where the real dawn barely shines through, and the blush of the red willow hints at dreams of a possible cowslip by the bank below. The blue jay has mentioned it in his endless chatter. He hesitates to predict arbutus, but he'll drop a hint that when the leaves in the wooded area push through the snow this early.... Once he found a hepatica bud on the last day of February.... Chatting with his old friend, the muskrat, last week.... And when you can see red pebbles in the creek at five o'clock in the afternoon.... But it’s no use expecting yellow orchids on the west knoll this spring, since some people found them there last year, and after that, you might as well.... Of course, cowslips next to red willows are really pretty, just like blue jays in a cedar tree with blue berries.... He goes on and on, but he’s seen a lot of life. And February needs her blue jays' relentless and conquering faith.
THE ELEMENTS OF POETRY
By George Santayana
George Santayana was born in Madrid in 1863, of Spanish parentage. He graduated from Harvard in 1886, and taught philosophy there, 1889-1911. He lives now, I think, in England. I must be frank: except his poems, I only know his work in that enthralling volume, Little Essays Drawn from the Writings of George Santayana, edited by L. Pearsall Smith. Much of it is too esoteric for my grasp, but Mr. Smith's redaction brings the fascination of Santayana's philosophy within the compass of what Tennyson called "a second-rate sensitive mind"; and, if mine is a criterion, such will find it of the highest stimulus. This discourse on poetry seems to me one of the most pregnant utterances on the subject. It is not perfectly appreciated by merely one reading; but even if you have to become a poet to enjoy it fully, that will do yourself least harm.
George Santayana was born in Madrid in 1863 to Spanish parents. He graduated from Harvard in 1886 and taught philosophy there from 1889 to 1911. I believe he currently lives in England. I have to be honest: aside from his poems, the only work of his I'm familiar with is the fascinating collection, Little Essays Drawn from the Writings of George Santayana, edited by L. Pearsall Smith. A lot of it is too complex for me, but Mr. Smith's editing makes Santayana's philosophy accessible even to what Tennyson referred to as "a second-rate sensitive mind"; and if my opinion counts for anything, this will be incredibly stimulating. His discussion on poetry strikes me as one of the most insightful statements on the subject. It’s not fully appreciated after just one reading, but even if you have to become a poet to fully enjoy it, that would be the least harmful thing for you.
IF poetry in its higher reaches is more philosophical than history, because it presents the memorable types of men and things apart from unmeaning circumstances, so in its primary substance and texture poetry is more philosophical than prose because it is nearer to our immediate experience. Poetry breaks up the trite conceptions designated by current words into the sensuous qualities out of which those conceptions were originally put together. We name what we conceive and believe in, not what we see; things, not images; souls, not voices and silhouettes. This naming, with the whole education of the senses which it accompanies, subserves the uses of life; in order to thread our way through the labyrinth of objects which assault us, we must make a great selection in our sensuous experience; half of what we see and hear we must pass over as insignificant, while we piece out the other half with such an ideal complement as is necessary to turn it into a fixed and well-ordered conception of the world. This labor of perception and understanding, this spelling of the material meaning of experience, is enshrined in our workaday language and ideas; ideas which are literally poetic in the sense that they are "made" (for every conception in an adult mind is a fiction), but which are at the same time prosaic because they are made economically, by abstraction, and for use.
If poetry at its highest form is more philosophical than history, because it showcases memorable types of people and things separate from meaningless situations, then in its essence and structure, poetry is more philosophical than prose because it's closer to our immediate experiences. Poetry takes the common ideas represented by everyday words and breaks them down into the sensory qualities from which those ideas were originally formed. We name what we think and believe in, not what we actually see; we refer to things instead of images; we connect with souls rather than just voices and shadows. This naming, along with the entire education of our senses that comes with it, serves the purposes of life; to navigate through the maze of objects that confront us, we have to make significant selections in our sensory experiences. We must overlook half of what we see and hear as unimportant while we enhance the other half with an ideal complement that's necessary to create a clear and organized understanding of the world. This effort of perception and understanding, this unpacking of the material meaning of experiences, is embedded in our everyday language and ideas; ideas that are essentially poetic, in that they are "constructed" (because every idea in an adult's mind is a fiction), but at the same time are practical because they are created efficiently, through abstraction, and for practical use.
When the child of poetic genius, who has learned this intellectual and utilitarian language in the cradle, goes afield and gathers for himself the aspects of nature, he begins to encumber his mind with the many living impressions which the intellect rejected, and which the language of the intellect can hardly convey; he labors with his nameless burden of perception, and wastes himself in aimless impulses of emotion and reverie, until finally the method of some art offers a vent to his inspiration, or to such part of it as can survive the test of time and the discipline of expression.
When a naturally gifted child, who has learned this intellectual and practical language from an early age, goes out into nature and takes in its many forms, he starts to overload his mind with all the vibrant impressions that intellect has ignored and that traditional language struggles to express. He grapples with this unexplained weight of perception, getting lost in random feelings and daydreams, until finally, the structure of some art provides an outlet for his inspiration—or at least for the part of it that can endure the challenges of time and the demands of communication.
The poet retains by nature the innocence of the eye, or recovers it easily; he disintegrates the fictions of common perception into their sensuous elements, gathers these together again into chance groups as the accidents of his environment or the affinities of his temperament may conjoin them; and this wealth of sensation and this freedom of fancy, which make an extraordinary ferment in his ignorant heart, presently bubble over into some kind of utterance.
The poet naturally keeps the innocence of the eye or easily regains it; he breaks down the everyday illusions into their sensory parts, brings them back together into random groups based on his surroundings or his personal vibes; and this abundance of feeling and this freedom of imagination, which create an amazing mix in his unknowing heart, soon overflow into some form of expression.
The fullness and sensuousness of such effusions bring them nearer to our actual perceptions than common discourse could come; yet they may easily seem remote, overloaded, and obscure to those accustomed to think entirely in symbols, and never to be interrupted in the algebraic rapidity of their thinking by a moment's pause and examination of heart, nor ever to plunge for a moment into that torrent of sensation and imagery over which the bridge of prosaic associations habitually carries us safe and dry to some conventional act. How slight that bridge commonly is, how much an affair of trestles and wire, we can hardly conceive until we have trained ourselves to an extreme sharpness of introspection. But psychologists have discovered, what laymen generally will confess, that we hurry by the procession of our mental images as we do by the traffic of the street, intent on business, gladly forgetting the noise and movement of the scene, and looking only for the corner we would turn or the door we would enter. Yet in our alertest moment the depths of the soul are still dreaming; the real world stands drawn in bare outline against a background of chaos and unrest. Our logical thoughts dominate experience only as the parallels and meridians make a checkerboard of the sea. They guide our voyage without controlling the waves, which toss forever in spite of our ability to ride over them to our chosen ends. Sanity is a madness put to good uses; waking life is a dream controlled.
The richness and sensuality of these expressions make them closer to our actual experiences than everyday conversations can. However, they might seem distant, overwhelming, and unclear to those who think purely in symbols, never taking a moment to pause and examine their feelings, and who resist diving into the flood of sensations and images that usually lead us safely and dryly to conventional actions. We often don't realize how flimsy that bridge really is, as it's largely a structure of flimsy support. It's not until we practice intense self-reflection that we begin to see this. Psychologists have found, and most people will agree, that we rush past the parade of our mental images like we do through street traffic, focused on our tasks, happily ignoring the noise and activity around us, only looking for the turn we want to take or the door we want to go through. Yet, even in our most alert moments, the depths of our souls continue to dream; the real world is sketched in simple lines against a backdrop of chaos and unrest. Our logical thoughts only steer our experiences, much like latitude and longitude create a grid over the ocean. They help us navigate without controlling the waves, which rage on regardless of our ability to ride over them towards our chosen goals. Sanity is a form of madness directed toward useful purposes; waking life is a managed dream.
Out of the neglected riches of this dream the poet fetches his wares. He dips into the chaos that underlies the rational shell of the world and brings up some superfluous image, some emotion dropped by the way, and reattaches it to the present object; he reinstates things unnecessary, he emphasizes things ignored, he paints in again into the landscape the tints which the intellect has allowed to fade from it. If he seems sometimes to obscure a fact, it is only because he is restoring an experience. The first element which the intellect rejects in forming its ideas of things is the emotion which accompanies the perception; and this emotion is the first thing the poet restores. He stops at the image, because he stops to enjoy. He wanders into the bypaths of association because the bypaths are delightful. The love of beauty which made him give measure and cadence to his words, the love of harmony which made him rhyme them, reappear in his imagination and make him select there also the material that is itself beautiful, or capable of assuming beautiful forms. The link that binds together the ideas, sometimes so wide apart, which his wit assimilates, is most often the link of emotion; they have in common some element of beauty or of horror.
Out of the overlooked treasures of this dream, the poet gathers his creations. He dives into the chaos beneath the logical surface of the world and pulls out some extra image, some emotion that was set aside, and reattaches it to the current object; he reinstates the unnecessary, highlights the overlooked, and adds back into the landscape the colors that the mind has let fade away. If he sometimes seems to cloud a fact, it’s just because he’s bringing back an experience. The first thing that the mind dismisses when forming its ideas is the emotion that comes with perception, and this emotion is the first thing the poet restores. He lingers on the image because he stops to appreciate it. He meanders through the side paths of association because those paths are enchanting. The love of beauty that made him give rhythm and flow to his words, the love of harmony that made him rhyme them, comes back in his imagination and leads him to select material that is beautiful in itself or capable of taking on beautiful forms. The connection that unites the ideas, which may sometimes be distant, that his wit incorporates is most often rooted in emotion; they share some element of beauty or horror.
NOCTURNE
By Simeon Strunsky
Simeon Strunsky is one of the most brilliant and certainly the most modest of American journalists. I regret that I cannot praise him, for at present we both work in the same office, and kind words uttered in public would cause him to avoid me forever. All that is necessary is for my readers to examine his books and they will say for themselves what I am restrained from hinting. There is a spontaneous play of chaff in Mr. Strunsky's lighter vein which is unsurpassed by any American humorist; his more inward musing is well exemplified by this selection (from Post-Impressions, 1914). If you read Post-Impressions, The Patient Observer, Belshazzar Court, Professor Latimer's Progress and Sinbad and His Friends, you will have made a fair start.
Simeon Strunsky is one of the most brilliant and definitely the most modest American journalists. I wish I could praise him, but right now we both work in the same office, and kind words shared in public would make him avoid me forever. All that’s needed is for my readers to check out his books, and they will conclude what I’m unable to say. There’s a lively wit in Mr. Strunsky's lighter writing that no American humorist can match; his deeper thoughts are well represented by this excerpt (from Post-Impressions, 1914). If you read Post-Impressions, The Patient Observer, Belshazzar Court, Professor Latimer's Progress, and Sinbad and His Friends, you'll have made a solid start.
Strunsky was born in Russia in 1879; studied at the Horace Mann High School (New York) and graduated from Columbia University in 1900. He worked on the staff of the New International Encyclopædia in 1900-06, and since then has been on the staff of the New York Evening Post, of which he is now editor.
Strunsky was born in Russia in 1879, studied at Horace Mann High School in New York, and graduated from Columbia University in 1900. He worked on the team of the New International Encyclopædia from 1900 to 1906, and since then has been part of the staff at the New York Evening Post, where he is now the editor.
ONCE every three months, with fair regularity, she was brought into the Night Court, found guilty, and fined. She came in between eleven o'clock and midnight, when the traffic of the court is at its heaviest, and it would be an hour, perhaps, before she was called to the bar. When her turn came she would rise from her seat at one end of the prisoners' bench and confront the magistrate.
ONCE every three months, with fair regularity, she was brought into the Night Court, found guilty, and fined. She came in between eleven o'clock and midnight, when the court was busiest, and it would be about an hour before she was called to the bar. When her turn came, she would stand up from her spot at one end of the prisoners' bench and face the magistrate.
Her eyes did not reach to the level of the magistrate's desk. A policeman in citizen's clothes would mount the witness stand, take oath with a seriousness of mien which was surprising, in view of the frequency with which he was called upon to repeat the formula, and testify in an illiterate drone to a definite infraction of the law of the State, committed in his presence and with his encouragement. While he spoke the magistrate would look at the ceiling. When she was called upon to answer she defended herself with an obvious lie or two, while the magistrate looked over her head. He would then condemn her to pay the sum of ten dollars to the State and let her go.
Her eyes didn't reach the height of the magistrate's desk. A policeman in plain clothes would get up on the witness stand, take an oath with a serious expression, which was surprising considering how often he had to repeat the routine, and testify in a monotonous tone about a clear violation of state law he witnessed and even encouraged. While he talked, the magistrate would stare at the ceiling. When it was her turn to respond, she defended herself with a couple of obvious lies while the magistrate looked over her head. He would then order her to pay ten dollars to the State and let her go.
She came to look forward to her visits at the Night Court.
She started to look forward to her visits to the Night Court.
The Night Court is no longer a center of general interest. During the first few months after it was established, two or three years ago, it was one of the great sights of a great city. For the newspapers it was a rich source of human-interest stories. It replaced Chinatown in its appeal to visitors from out-of-town. It stirred even the languid pulses of the native inhabitant with its offerings of something new in the way of "life." The sociologists, sincere and amateur, crowded the benches and took notes.
The Night Court isn't really a place of general interest anymore. In the first few months after it opened, a couple of years ago, it was one of the city's big attractions. It was a goldmine for newspapers looking for human-interest stories. It took the place of Chinatown in drawing visitors from out of town. It even got the local residents excited with its fresh take on "life." Both serious and amateur sociologists filled the benches and took notes.
To-day the novelty is worn off. The newspapers long ago abandoned the Night Court, clergymen go to it rarely for their texts, and the tango has taken its place. But the sociologists and the casual visitor have not disappeared. Serious people, anxious for an immediate vision of the pity of life, continue to fill the benches comfortably. No session of the court is without its little group of social investigators, among whom the women are in the majority. Many of them are young women, exceedingly sympathetic, handsomely gowned, and very well taken care of.
Today, the novelty has worn off. The newspapers abandoned the Night Court long ago, clergymen rarely go there for inspiration anymore, and the tango has taken its place. But sociologists and casual visitors have not disappeared. Serious people, looking for a quick glimpse of life's struggles, still fill the benches comfortably. No session of the court is without its small group of social investigators, among whom women are in the majority. Many of them are young women, very sympathetic, well-dressed, and well taken care of.
As she sat at one end of the prisoners' bench waiting her turn before the magistrate's desk, she would cast a sidelong glance over the railing that separated her from the handsomely gowned, gently bred, sympathetic young women in the audience. She observed with extraordinary admiration and delight those charming faces softened in pity, the graceful bearing, the admirably constructed yet simple coiffures, the elegance of dress, which she compared with the best that the windows in Sixth Avenue could show. She was amazed to find such gowns actually being worn instead of remaining as an unattainable ideal on smiling lay figures in the shop windows.
As she sat at one end of the prisoners' bench waiting for her turn in front of the magistrate, she stole a glance over the railing that separated her from the elegantly dressed, well-bred, sympathetic young women in the audience. She watched with great admiration and delight those charming faces softened by pity, the graceful postures, the beautifully styled yet simple hairstyles, and the elegance of their outfits, which she compared to the best that the windows on Sixth Avenue had to offer. She was amazed to see such gowns being worn in real life instead of being just an unattainable dream on smiling mannequins in shop windows.
Occupants of the prisoners' bench are not supposed to stare at the spectators. She had to steal a glance now and then. Her visits to the Night Court had become so much a matter of routine that she would venture a peep over the railing while the case immediately preceding her own was being tried. Once or twice she was surprised by the clerk who called her name. She stood up mechanically and faced the magistrate as Officer Smith, in civilian clothes, mounted the witness stand.
Occupants of the prisoners' bench aren’t supposed to stare at the spectators. She had to sneak a glance now and then. Her visits to the Night Court had become so routine that she would risk a peek over the railing while the case right before hers was being tried. A couple of times she was caught off guard by the clerk who called her name. She stood up automatically and faced the magistrate as Officer Smith, dressed in civilian clothes, took the witness stand.
She had no grudge against Officer Smith. She did not visualize him either as a person or as a part of a system. He was merely an incident of her trade. She had neither the training nor the imagination to look behind Officer Smith and see a communal policy which has not the power to suppress, nor the courage to acknowledge, nor the skill to regulate, and so contents itself with sending out full-fed policemen in civilian clothes to work up the evidence that defends society against her kind through the imposition of a ten-dollar fine.
She held no resentment toward Officer Smith. She didn’t see him as an individual or as a part of a larger system. He was just a moment in her job. She lacked the training and the perspective to look beyond Officer Smith and recognize a collective policy that neither has the strength to suppress, nor the courage to admit, nor the skill to manage, and instead just sends well-fed cops in plain clothes to gather the evidence that protects society against her type by imposing a ten-dollar fine.
To some of the women on the visitors' benches the cruelty of the process came home: this business of setting a two-hundred-pound policeman in citizen's clothes, backed up by magistrates, clerks, court criers, interpreters, and court attendants, to worrying a ten-dollar fine out of a half-grown woman under an enormous imitation ostrich plume. The professional sociologists were chiefly interested in the money cost of this process to the tax-payer, and they took notes on the proportion of first offenders. Yet the Night Court is a remarkable advance in civilization. Formerly, in addition to her fine, the prisoner would pay a commission to the professional purveyor of bail.
To some of the women sitting on the visitors' benches, the harshness of the situation hit home: the idea of putting a two-hundred-pound police officer in civilian clothes, supported by judges, clerks, court announcers, interpreters, and court staff, to extract a ten-dollar fine from a young woman wearing a massive fake ostrich feather. The professional sociologists were mainly focused on the financial impact of this process on taxpayers and took notes on how many were first-time offenders. Still, the Night Court represents a significant step forward for society. In the past, in addition to her fine, the defendant would also have to pay a fee to the professional bail broker.
Sometimes, if the magistrate was young or new to the business, she would be given a chance against Officer Smith. She would be called to the witness chair and under oath be allowed to elaborate on the obvious lies which constituted her usual defense. This would give her the opportunity, between the magistrate's questions, of sweeping the courtroom with a full, hungry look for as much as half a minute at a time. She saw the women in the audience only, and their clothes. The pity in their eyes did not move her, because she was not in the least interested in what they thought, but in how they looked and what they wore. They were part of a world which she would read about—she read very little—in the society columns of the Sunday newspaper. They were the women around whom headlines were written and whose pictures were printed frequently on the first page.
Sometimes, if the judge was young or new to the job, she would get a chance against Officer Smith. She would be called to the witness stand and under oath be allowed to elaborate on the obvious lies that made up her usual defense. This would give her the chance, between the judge's questions, to scan the courtroom with a full, hungry look for as much as half a minute at a time. She only noticed the women in the audience and their clothes. The pity in their eyes didn’t affect her because she wasn’t at all interested in what they thought, but in how they looked and what they wore. They were part of a world she would read about—she read very little—in the society columns of the Sunday newspaper. They were the women around whom headlines were written and whose pictures often appeared on the front page.
She could study them with comparative leisure in the Night Court. Outside in the course of her daily routine she might catch an occasional glimpse of these same women, through the windows of a passing taxi, or in the matinée crowds, or going in and out of the fashionable shops. But her work took her seldom into the region of taxicabs and fashionable shops. The nature of her occupation kept her to furtive corners and the dark side of streets. Nor was she at such times in the mood for just appreciation of the beautiful things in life. More than any other walk of life, hers was of an exacting nature, calling for intense powers of concentration both as regards the public and the police. It was different in the Night Court. Here, having nothing to fear and nothing out of the usual to hope for, she might give herself up to the esthetic contemplation of a beautiful world of which, at any other time, she could catch mere fugitive aspects.
She could observe them at her leisure in the Night Court. Outside, during her daily routine, she might spot these same women through the windows of a passing taxi, in the crowds at matinees, or going in and out of trendy shops. But her job rarely took her to the area of taxis and fashionable boutiques. The nature of her work kept her in hidden corners and on the darker side of streets. Plus, she wasn’t in the mood to truly appreciate the beautiful things in life during those times. More than any other job, hers was demanding, requiring intense focus on both the public and the police. It was different in the Night Court. Here, with nothing to fear and nothing unusual to hope for, she could immerse herself in the aesthetic enjoyment of a beautiful world that, at any other time, she could only glimpse fleetingly.
Sometimes I wonder why people think that life is only what they see and hear, and not what they read of. Take the Night Court. The visitor really sees nothing and hears nothing that he has not read a thousand times in his newspaper and had it described in greater detail and with better-trained powers of observation than he can bring to bear in person. What new phase of life is revealed by seeing in the body, say, a dozen practitioners of a trade of whom we know there are several tens of thousands in New York? They have been described by the human-interest reporters, analyzed by the statisticians, defended by the social revolutionaries, and explained away by the optimists. For that matter, to the faithful reader of the newspapers, daily and Sunday, what can there be new in this world from the Pyramids by moonlight to the habits of the night prowler? Can the upper classes really acquire for themselves, through slumming parties and visits to the Night Court, anything like the knowledge that books and newspapers can furnish them? Can the lower classes ever hope to obtain that complete view of the Fifth Avenue set which the Sunday columns offer them? And yet there the case stands: only by seeing and hearing for ourselves, however imperfectly, do we get the sense of reality.
Sometimes I wonder why people think that life is just what they see and hear, and not what they read about. Take the Night Court. The visitor doesn't really see or hear anything they haven't read a thousand times in their newspaper, described in more detail and with better observational skills than they can muster in person. What new aspect of life is revealed by seeing, for example, a dozen people practicing a trade when we know there are tens of thousands doing the same in New York? They've been detailed by human-interest reporters, analyzed by statisticians, defended by social revolutionaries, and explained away by optimists. For that matter, for those who faithfully read the newspapers daily and on Sunday, what could possibly be new in the world, from the Pyramids by moonlight to the habits of night prowlers? Can the upper classes really gain, through slumming parties and visits to the Night Court, any real knowledge that books and newspapers can provide? Can the lower classes ever hope to get that full view of the Fifth Avenue crowd that the Sunday columns give them? And yet the reality stands: only by seeing and hearing for ourselves, no matter how imperfectly, do we grasp the sense of reality.
That is why our criminal courts are probably our most influential schools of democracy. More than our settlement houses, more than our subsidized dancing-schools for shopgirls, they encourage the get-together process through which one-half the world learns how the other half lives. On either side of the railing of the prisoners' cage is an audience and a stage.
That’s why our criminal courts are likely our most powerful schools of democracy. More than our community centers, more than our funded dance schools for working women, they promote the gathering process where one half of the world learns about how the other half lives. On either side of the railing of the prisoners' enclosure is an audience and a stage.
BEER AND CIDER
By George Saintsbury
How pleasant it is to find the famous Professor Saintsbury—known to students as the author of histories of the English and French literatures, the History of Criticism and History of English Prosody—spending the evening so hospitably in his cellar. I print this—from his downright delightful Notes on a Cellar Book—as a kind of tantalizing penance. It is a charming example of how pleasantly a great scholar can unbend on occasion.
How nice it is to see the famous Professor Saintsbury—known to students as the author of histories of English and French literature, the History of Criticism and History of English Prosody—spending the evening so graciously in his cellar. I share this—from his wonderfully delightful Notes on a Cellar Book—as a sort of teasing penance. It's a lovely example of how a great scholar can relax and enjoy himself every now and then.
George Saintsbury, born in 1845, studied at Merton College, Oxford, taught school 1868-76, was a journalist in London 1876-95, and held the chair of English Literature at Edinburgh University, 1895-1915. If you read Notes on a Cellar Book, as you should, you will agree that it is a charmingly light-hearted causerie for a gentleman to publish at the age of seventy-five. More than ever one feels that sound liquor, in moderation, is a preservative of both body and wit.
George Saintsbury, born in 1845, studied at Merton College, Oxford, taught school from 1868 to 1876, worked as a journalist in London from 1876 to 1895, and was the chair of English Literature at Edinburgh University from 1895 to 1915. If you read Notes on a Cellar Book, which you definitely should, you'll find it to be a delightfully light-hearted causerie for a man to publish at the age of seventy-five. More than ever, it's clear that good liquor, in moderation, keeps both the body and the mind sharp.
THERE is no beverage which I have liked "to live with" more than Beer; but I have never had a cellar large enough to accommodate much of it, or an establishment numerous enough to justify the accommodation. In the good days when servants expected beer, but did not expect to be treated otherwise than as servants, a cask or two was necessary; and persons who were "quite" generally took care that the small beer they drank should be the same as that which they gave to their domestics, though they might have other sorts as well. For these better sorts at least the good old rule was, when you began on one cask always to have in another. Even Cobbett, whose belief in beer was the noblest feature in his character, allowed that it required some keeping. The curious "white ale," or lober agol—which, within the memory of man, used to exist in Devonshire and Cornwall, but which, even half a century ago, I have vainly sought there—was, I believe, drunk quite new; but then it was not pure malt and not hopped at all, but had eggs ("pullet-sperm in the brewage") and other foreign bodies in it.
There’s no drink I've loved "to live with" more than beer; but I've never had a cellar big enough to store much of it, or a household large enough to justify that storage. Back in the days when servants expected beer but didn’t expect to be treated any differently than servants, having a barrel or two was necessary; and people who were "proper" made sure that the small beer they drank was the same as what they gave to their staff, even if they had other kinds on hand too. For these better types, the old rule was, whenever you started on one barrel, you always needed to have another one ready. Even Cobbett, who believed in beer as a great principle, admitted that it needed some care. The peculiar "white ale," or lober agol—which, within living memory, was found in Devonshire and Cornwall, but which I have unsuccessfully sought there even half a century ago—was, I believe, consumed fresh; but it wasn’t made with pure malt and wasn’t hopped at all, instead containing eggs ("pullet-sperm in the brewage") and other unusual ingredients.
I did once drink, at St David's, ale so new that it frothed from the cask as creamily as if it had been bottled: and I wondered whether the famous beer of Bala, which Borrow found so good at his first visit and so bad at his second, had been like it.[E]
I once had a drink in St David’s, beer so fresh that it foamed from the cask like it had been bottled: and I wondered if the famous beer from Bala, which Borrow loved on his first visit and hated on his second, was similar to it.[E]
On the other hand, the very best Bass I ever drank had had an exactly contrary experience. In the year 1875, when I was resident at Elgin, I and a friend now dead, the Procurator-Fiscal of the district, devoted the May "Sacrament holidays," which were then still kept in those remote parts, to a walking tour up the Findhorn and across to Loch Ness and Glen Urquhart. At the Freeburn Inn on the first-named river we found some beer of singular excellence: and, asking the damsel who waited on us about it, were informed that a cask of Bass had been put in during the previous October, but, owing to a sudden break in the weather and the departure of all visitors, had never been tapped till our arrival.
On the other hand, the best Bass I ever had experienced something totally different. In 1875, when I was living in Elgin, a friend of mine who has since passed away, the Procurator-Fiscal of the district, and I spent the May "Sacrament holidays," which were still celebrated in those remote areas, on a walking tour up the Findhorn and over to Loch Ness and Glen Urquhart. At the Freeburn Inn by the first river, we found some outstanding beer. When we asked the young woman who served us about it, she told us that a cask of Bass had been placed there the previous October, but due to a sudden change in the weather and the departure of all the visitors, it hadn’t been tapped until we arrived.
Beer of ordinary strength left too long in the cask gets "hard" of course; but no one who deserves to drink it would drink it from anything but the cask if he could help it. Jars are makeshifts, though useful makeshifts: and small beer will not keep in them for much more than a week. Nor are the very small barrels, known by various affectionate diminutives ("pin," etc.) in the country districts, much to be recommended. "We'll drink it in the firkin, my boy!" is the lowest admission in point of volume that should be allowed. Of one such firkin I have a pleasant memory and memorial, though it never reposed in my home cellar. It was just before the present century opened, and some years before we Professors in Scotland had, of our own motion and against considerable opposition, given up half of the old six months' holiday without asking for or receiving a penny more salary. (I have since chuckled at the horror and wrath with which Mr. Smillie and Mr. Thomas would hear of such profligate conduct.) One could therefore move about with fairly long halts: and I had taken from a friend a house at Abingdon for some time. So, though I could not even then drink quite as much beer as I could thirty years earlier a little higher up the Thames, it became necessary to procure a cask. It came—one of Bass's minor mildnesses—affectionately labeled "Mr. George Saintsbury. Full to the bung." I detached the card, and I believe I have it to this day as my choicest (because quite unsolicited) testimonial.
Beer of regular strength left too long in the cask gets "hard," of course; but no one who appreciates it would drink it from anything but the cask if they could avoid it. Jars are temporary solutions, though they serve a purpose: and small beer won't last in them for more than about a week. The very small barrels, known by various cute nicknames ("pin," etc.) in the countryside, aren't much better. "We'll drink it from the firkin, my boy!" is the minimum volume that should be acceptable. I have a fond memory of one such firkin, even though it never stayed in my home cellar. It was just before the current century began, and a few years before we Professors in Scotland, on our own initiative and facing a lot of resistance, decided to give up half of the traditional six-month holiday without asking for or receiving any additional pay. (I've since chuckled at the shock and anger Mr. Smillie and Mr. Thomas would feel about such extravagant behavior.) One could, therefore, wander around with relatively long breaks: and I had rented a house in Abingdon from a friend for a while. So, even though I couldn't drink nearly as much beer as I could have thirty years earlier a little further up the Thames, I needed to get a cask. It arrived—one of Bass's lighter mild ales—affectionately labeled "Mr. George Saintsbury. Full to the bung." I took off the card, and I believe I still have it to this day as my prized (because completely unsolicited) testimonial.
Very strong beer permits itself, of course, to be bottled and kept in bottles: but I rather doubt whether it also is not best from the wood; though it is equally of course, much easier to cellar it and keep it bottled. Its kinds are various and curious. "Scotch ale" is famous, and at its best (I never drank better than Younger's) excellent: but its tendency, I think, is to be too sweet. I once invested in some—not Younger's—which I kept for nearly sixteen years, and which was still treacle at the end. Bass's No. 1 requires no praises. Once when living in the Cambridgeshire village mentioned earlier I had some, bottled in Cambridge itself, of great age and excellence. Indeed, two guests, though both of them were Cambridge men, and should have had what Mr. Lang once called the "robust" habits of that University, fell into one ditch after partaking of it. (I own that the lanes thereabouts are very dark.) In former days, though probably not at present, you could often find rather choice specimens of strong beer produced at small breweries in the country. I remember such even in the Channel Islands. And I suspect the Universities themselves have been subject to "declensions and fallings off." I know that in my undergraduate days at Merton we always had proper beer-glasses, like the old "flute" champagnes, served regularly at cheese-time with a most noble beer called "Archdeacon," which was then actually brewed in the sacristy of the College chapel. I have since—a slight sorrow to season the joy of reinstatement there—been told that it is now obtained from outside.[F] And All Souls is the only other college in which, from actual recent experience, I can imagine the possibility of the exorcism,
Very strong beer can, of course, be bottled and stored in bottles; however, I doubt it's not better from the cask. Still, it’s obviously much easier to store it when it’s bottled. There are various and interesting types. "Scotch ale" is well-known, and at its best (I’ve never had better than Younger's) it’s excellent, but I find it tends to be too sweet. I once bought some—not Younger's—that I kept for nearly sixteen years, and it was still syrupy by the end. Bass's No. 1 needs no endorsements. When I lived in the Cambridgeshire village I mentioned earlier, I had some that was bottled in Cambridge itself, of great age and quality. In fact, two guests, both Cambridge men who should have had what Mr. Lang once called the "robust" habits of that University, fell into a ditch after having it. (I admit that the lanes around there are very dark.) In the past, although probably not now, you could often find select samples of strong beer made at small breweries in the countryside. I even remember encountering such beers in the Channel Islands. I suspect the Universities have also experienced "declines." I know that during my time as an undergraduate at Merton, we always had proper beer glasses, like the old "flute" champagnes, served regularly at cheese time with a remarkable beer called "Archdeacon," which was actually brewed in the sacristy of the College chapel. Since then—a slight disappointment to temper the joy of my return there—I’ve heard it now comes from elsewhere. And All Souls is the only other college where, based on recent experience, I can imagine a similar tradition.
Strongbeerum! discede a lay-fratre Petro,
Strongbeerum! depart from brother Petro,
I have never had many experiences of real "home-brewed," but two which I had were pleasing. There was much home-brewing in East Anglia at the time I lived there, and I once got the village carpenter to give me some of his own manufacture. It was as good light ale as I ever wish to drink (many times better than the wretched stuff that Dora has foisted on us), and he told me that, counting in every expense for material, cost and wear of plant, etc., it came to about a penny[G] a quart. The other was very different. The late Lord de Tabley—better or at least longer known as Mr. Leicester Warren—once gave a dinner at the Athenæum at which I was present, and had up from his Cheshire cellars some of the old ale for which that county is said to be famous, to make flip after dinner. It was shunned by most of the pusillanimous guests, but not by me, and it was excellent. But I should like to have tried it unflipped.[H]
I’ve never had a lot of experiences with homemade drinks, but the two I did have were great. There was a lot of home brewing in East Anglia when I lived there, and I got the village carpenter to give me some of his brew. It was the best light ale I’ve ever had (way better than the terrible stuff that Dora has pushed on us), and he told me that when you add up all the costs for materials, equipment wear, and everything, it came to about a penny[G] a quart. The other experience was quite different. The late Lord de Tabley—better known for a longer time as Mr. Leicester Warren—once hosted a dinner at the Athenæum where I was a guest and brought out some of the old ale from his Cheshire cellars, which that county is famous for, to make flip after dinner. Most guests avoided it, but I didn’t, and it was fantastic. But I would have liked to try it without the flip.[H]
I never drank mum, which all know from The Antiquary, some from "The Ryme of Sir Lancelot Bogle," and some again from the notice which Mr. Gladstone's love of Scott (may it plead for him!) gave it once in some Budget debate, I think. It is said to be brewed of wheat, which is not in its favor (wheat was meant to be eaten, not drunk) and very bitter, which is. Nearly all bitter drinks are good. The only time I ever drank "spruce" beer I did not like it. The comeliest of black malts is, of course, that noble liquor called of Guinness. Here at least I think England cannot match Ireland, for our stouts are, as a rule, too sweet and "clammy." But there used to be in the country districts a sort of light porter which was one of the most refreshing liquids conceivable for hot weather. I have drunk it in Yorkshire at the foot of Roseberry Topping, out of big stone bottles like champagne magnums. But that was nearly sixty years ago. Genuine lager beer is no more to be boycotted than genuine hock, though, by the way, the best that I ever drank (it was at the good town of King's Lynn) was Low not High Dutch in origin. It was so good that I wrote to the shippers at Rotterdam to see if I could get some sent to Leith, but the usual difficulties in establishing connection between wholesale dealers and individual buyers prevented this. It was, however, something of a consolation to read the delightful name, "our top-and-bottom-fermentation beer," in which the manufacturer's letter, in very sound English for the most part, spoke of it. English lager I must say I have never liked; perhaps I have been unlucky in my specimens. And good as Scotch strong beer is, I cannot say that the lighter and medium kinds are very good in Scotland. In fact, in Edinburgh I used to import beer of this kind from Lincolnshire,[I] where there is no mistake about it. My own private opinion is that John Barleycorn, north of Tweed, says: "I am for whisky, and not for ale."
I never drank much, mom, which everyone knows from The Antiquary, some from "The Rhyme of Sir Lancelot Bogle," and some from the mention that Mr. Gladstone's love for Scott (may it work in his favor!) once gave it during some Budget debate, I think. It's said to be brewed from wheat, which doesn’t really help its case (wheat is meant to be eaten, not drunk) and it's very bitter, which does help. Almost all bitter drinks are good. The only time I tried "spruce" beer, I didn’t like it. The prettiest black malts are, of course, that noble drink called Guinness. Here, at least, I think England can't compete with Ireland, because our stouts are generally too sweet and "clammy." But there used to be a kind of light porter in the countryside that was one of the most refreshing drinks imaginable for hot weather. I drank it in Yorkshire at the foot of Roseberry Topping, from big stone bottles like champagne magnums. But that was almost sixty years ago. Genuine lager beer shouldn’t be boycotted any more than genuine hock; by the way, the best I ever had (it was in the fine town of King's Lynn) was Low Dutch, not High Dutch in origin. It was so good that I wrote to the shippers in Rotterdam to see if I could get some sent to Leith, but the usual difficulties in connecting wholesale dealers with individual buyers stopped that. It was, however, somewhat comforting to read the delightful name, "our top-and-bottom-fermentation beer," as mentioned in the manufacturer's letter, which was mostly written in very proper English. I've got to say I’ve never liked English lager; maybe I’ve just been unlucky with what I've tried. And while Scotch strong beer is good, I can't say the lighter and medium kinds are very good in Scotland. In fact, in Edinburgh, I used to import this kind of beer from Lincolnshire, [I] where there’s no doubt about it. My personal opinion is that John Barleycorn north of the Tweed says: "I’m for whisky, not ale."
"Cider and perry," says Burton, "are windy drinks"; yet he observes that the inhabitants of certain shires in England (he does not, I am sorry to say, mention Devon) of Normandy in France, and of Guipuzcoa in Spain, "are no whit offended by them." I have never liked perry on the few occasions on which I have tasted it; perhaps because its taste has always reminded me of the smell of some stuff that my nurse used to put on my hair when I was small. But I certainly have been no whit offended by cider, either in divers English shires, including very specially those which Burton does not include, Devon, Dorset, and Somerset, or in Normandy. The Guipuzcoan variety I have, unfortunately, had no opportunity of tasting. Besides, perry seems to me to be an abuse of that excellent creature the pear, whereas cider-apples furnish one of the most cogent arguments to prove that Providence had the production of alcoholic liquors directly in its eye. They are good for nothing else whatever, and they are excellent good for that. I think I like the weak ciders, such as those of the west and the Normandy, better than the stronger ones,[J] and draught cider much better than bottled. That of Norfolk, which has been much commended of late, I have never tasted; but I have had both Western and West-Midland cider in my cellar, often in bottle and once or twice in cask. It is a pity that the liquor—extremely agreeable to the taste, one of the most thirst-quenching to be anywhere found, of no overpowering alcoholic strength as a rule, and almost sovereign for gout—is not to be drunk without caution, and sometimes has to be given up altogether from other medical aspects. Qualified with brandy—a mixture which was first imparted to me at a roadside inn by a very amiable Dorsetshire farmer whom I met while walking from Sherborne to Blandford in my first Oxford "long"—it is capital: and cider-cup who knoweth not? If there be any such, let him not wait longer than to-morrow before establishing knowledge. As for the pure juice of the apple, four gallons a day per man used to be the harvest allowance in Somerset when I was a boy. It is refreshing only to think of it now.
"Cider and perry," says Burton, "are gassy drinks"; yet he notes that the people of certain counties in England (he unfortunately does not mention Devon), Normandy in France, and Guipuzcoa in Spain, "are not bothered by them." I have never enjoyed perry on the few occasions I've tried it; perhaps because its flavor has always reminded me of a product my nurse used to put in my hair when I was little. But I certainly haven't been bothered by cider, whether in various English counties, especially those that Burton skips, like Devon, Dorset, and Somerset, or in Normandy. Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to try the Guipuzcoan variety. Besides, perry seems to me to be a poor use of that wonderful fruit, the pear, while cider apples provide one of the strongest arguments that Providence intended for the creation of alcoholic beverages. They are good for nothing else, but they are excellent for that. I tend to prefer the lighter ciders, like those from the west and Normandy, more than the stronger ones,[J] and draft cider over bottled. I have never tasted the cider from Norfolk, which has been highly praised recently; however, I have had both Western and West-Midland cider in my cellar, often in bottles and once or twice in cask. It's a shame that the drink—extremely pleasant to the palate, one of the most thirst-quenching found anywhere, generally not too strong, and almost a cure for gout—cannot be consumed without care, and sometimes has to be avoided completely for medical reasons. Mixed with brandy—a blend first introduced to me at a roadside inn by a very friendly farmer from Dorset whom I met while walking from Sherborne to Blandford during my first long trip to Oxford—it is excellent: and cider cup, who doesn’t know? If anyone doesn't, they should not wait longer than tomorrow to learn. As for pure apple juice, four gallons a day per person used to be the harvest allowance in Somerset when I was a boy. It's refreshing just to think about it now.
Of mead or metheglin, the third indigenous liquor of Southern Britain, I know little. Indeed, I should have known nothing at all of it had it not been that the parish-clerk and sexton of the Cambridgeshire village where I lived, and the caretaker of a vinery which I rented, was a bee-keeper and mead-maker. He gave me some once. I did not care much for it. It was like a sweet weak beer, with, of course, the special honey flavor. But I should imagine that it was susceptible of a great many different modes of preparation, and it is obvious, considering what it is made of, that it could be brewed of almost any strength. Old literary notices generally speak of it as strong.
I know little about mead or metheglin, the third local drink of Southern Britain. Honestly, I wouldn't have known anything about it if it weren't for the parish clerk and sexton of the Cambridgeshire village where I lived, who was also the caretaker of a vineyard I rented. He once gave me some. I didn't really like it much. It tasted like a sweet, weak beer, with that distinct honey flavor. However, I imagine it can be made in many different ways, and it's clear, given its ingredients, that it could be brewed to almost any strength. Older literary references usually describe it as strong.
A FREE MAN'S WORSHIP
By Bertrand Russell
"A Free Man's Worship" was written in 1902; it was republished by Mr. Russell in 1918 in his volume Mysticism and Logic. It is interesting to note carefully Mr. Russell's views in this fine essay in connection with the fact that he was imprisoned by the British Government as a pacifist during the War.
"A Free Man's Worship" was written in 1902; it was republished by Mr. Russell in 1918 in his volume Mysticism and Logic. It's worth noting Mr. Russell's perspectives in this excellent essay, especially considering that he was imprisoned by the British Government as a pacifist during the War.
Much of Mr. Russell's writing, in mathematical and philosophical fields, is above the head of the desultory reader; but so stimulating a paper as this one should not be neglected by the moderately inquisitive amateur.
A lot of Mr. Russell's writing in math and philosophy can be challenging for casual readers, but an engaging piece like this one shouldn’t be overlooked by those with a moderate curiosity.
Bertrand Russell was born in 1872, studied at Trinity College, Cambridge, and is widely known as a thinker of uncompromising liberalism.
Bertrand Russell was born in 1872, studied at Trinity College, Cambridge, and is well-known as a thinker of strong liberal beliefs.
TO Dr. Faustus in his study Mephistopheles told the history of the Creation, saying:
TO Dr. Faustus in his study, Mephistopheles shared the story of Creation, saying:
"The endless praises of the choirs of angels had begun to grow wearisome; for, after all, did he not deserve their praise? Had he not given them endless joy? Would it not be more amusing to obtain undeserved praise, to be worshiped by beings whom he tortured? He smiled inwardly, and resolved that the great drama should be performed.
"The constant praise from the choirs of angels was starting to feel tiresome; after all, didn’t he deserve their praise? Hadn’t he given them endless joy? Wouldn’t it be more entertaining to receive undeserved adoration, to be worshiped by beings he tormented? He smiled to himself and decided that the grand performance should take place."
"For countless ages the hot nebula whirled aimlessly through space. At length it began to take shape, the central mass threw off planets, the planets cooled, boiling seas and burning mountains heaved and tossed, from black masses of cloud hot sheets of rain deluged the barely solid crust. And now the first germ of life grew in the depths of the ocean, and developed rapidly in the fructifying warmth into vast forest trees, huge ferns springing from the damp mould, sea monsters breeding, fighting, devouring, and passing away. And from the monsters, as the play unfolded itself, Man was born, with the power of thought, the knowledge of good and evil, and the cruel thirst for worship. And Man saw that all is passing in this mad, monstrous world, that all is struggling to snatch, at any cost, a few brief moments of life before Death's inexorable decree. And Man said: 'There is a hidden purpose, could we but fathom it, and the purpose is good; for we must reverence something, and in the visible world there is nothing worthy of reverence.' And Man stood aside from the struggle, resolving that God intended harmony to come out of chaos by human efforts. And when he followed the instincts which God had transmitted to him from his ancestry of beasts of prey, he called it Sin, and asked God to forgive him. But he doubted whether he could be justly forgiven, until he invented a divine Plan by which God's wrath was to have been appeased. And seeing the present was bad, he made it yet worse, that thereby the future might be better. And he gave God thanks for the strength that enabled him to forgo even the joys that were possible. And God smiled; and when he saw that Man had become perfect in renunciation and worship, he sent another sun through the sky, which crashed into Man's sun; and all returned again to nebula.
For countless ages, the hot nebula spun aimlessly through space. Eventually, it began to take shape; the central mass formed planets, the planets cooled, boiling seas and burning mountains surged and tossed, and sheets of hot rain poured down from dark clouds onto the barely solid crust. Now, the first spark of life emerged in the depths of the ocean, quickly evolving in the nourishing warmth into vast trees and huge ferns rising from the damp soil, while sea monsters bred, fought, devoured each other, and eventually died. From these monsters, as the story unfolded, Man was born, equipped with the ability to think, to know good and evil, and to have a cruel desire for worship. Man realized that everything is fleeting in this chaotic, monstrous world; everything struggles to grasp a few brief moments of life before Death's unyielding decree. Man reflected, "There must be a hidden purpose, if only we could understand it, and that purpose is good; for we must have something to revere, and in the visible world, nothing is worthy of reverence." So Man stepped back from the struggle, believing that God intended for harmony to emerge from chaos through human efforts. When he acted on the instincts God had passed down from his predatory ancestors, he called it Sin and asked God for forgiveness. But he wasn't sure if he could truly be forgiven until he devised a divine Plan to appease God's wrath. Discontent with the present state, he made it even worse, thinking it would lead to a better future. He thanked God for the strength that allowed him to give up even the possible joys. And God smiled; when He saw that Man had become perfect in self-denial and worship, He sent another sun across the sky, which collided with Man's sun, and everything returned to nebula.
"'Yes,' he murmured, 'it was a good play; I will have it performed again.'"
"'Yes,' he whispered, 'it was a great play; I’ll have it staged again.'"
Such, in outline, but even more purposeless, more void of meaning, is the world which Science presents for our belief. Amid such a world, if anywhere, our ideals henceforward must find a home. That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labors of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins—all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.
The world that Science shows us is even more pointless and meaningless. In this world, if anywhere, our ideals must find a place. Humans are the result of causes that never anticipated the outcomes; our origins, growth, hopes and fears, loves and beliefs are just the result of random arrangements of atoms. No amount of fire, heroism, or intensity of thought and feeling can keep an individual life alive after death. All the work and devotion throughout history, all the inspiration and brilliance of human creativity, is destined to vanish in the vastness of the solar system’s death; the entire structure of human achievement will eventually be covered by the ruins of a broken universe. While these notions may not be completely indisputable, they are so nearly certain that no philosophy that disregards them can survive. Only with these truths as a framework, only on the solid ground of unwavering despair, can the foundation of the soul's existence be securely built from now on.
How, in such an alien and inhuman world, can so powerless a creature as Man preserve his aspirations untarnished? A strange mystery it is that Nature, omnipotent but blind, in the revolutions of her secular hurryings through the abysses of space, has brought forth at last a child, subject still to her power, but gifted with sight, with knowledge of good and evil, with the capacity of judging all the works of his unthinking Mother. In spite of Death, the mark and seal of the parental control, Man is yet free, during his brief years, to examine, to criticize, to know, and in imagination to create. To him alone, in the world with which he is acquainted, this freedom belongs; and in this lies his superiority to the resistless forces that control his outward life.
How, in such a strange and uncaring world, can a powerless creature like Man keep his dreams intact? It’s a strange mystery that Nature, all-powerful yet blind, in her endless rush through the depths of space, has finally produced a being, still under her influence, but equipped with sight, an understanding of right and wrong, and the ability to judge all the creations of his unthinking Mother. Despite Death, the mark of parental control, Man is still free, during his short life, to explore, to question, to understand, and to imagine new things. This freedom is unique to him in the world he knows; and in this lies his advantage over the unstoppable forces that dictate his outer existence.
The savage, like ourselves, feels the oppression of his impotence before the powers of Nature; but having in himself nothing that he respects more than Power, he is willing to prostrate himself before his gods, without inquiring whether they are worthy of his worship. Pathetic and very terrible is the long history of cruelty and torture, of degradation and human sacrifice, endured in the hope of placating the jealous gods: surely, the trembling believer thinks, when what is most precious has been freely given, their lust for blood must be appeased, and more will not be required. The religion of Moloch—as such creeds may be generically called—is in essence the cringing submission of the slave, who dare not, even in his heart, allow the thought that his master deserves no adulation. Since the independence of ideals is not yet acknowledged, Power may be freely worshiped, and receive an unlimited respect, despite its wanton infliction of pain.
The savage, like us, feels the weight of his powerlessness against the forces of Nature; but since he values nothing more than Power, he’s willing to bow down to his gods without questioning if they deserve his worship. It’s both sad and horrifying to think about the long history of cruelty, torture, degradation, and human sacrifice suffered in the hope of appeasing jealous gods: the trembling believer thinks that after giving up what is most precious, their hunger for blood must be satisfied, and nothing more will be demanded. The religion of Moloch—this term can describe such beliefs—is fundamentally the submissive surrender of the slave, who doesn’t even dare to think in his heart that his master is unworthy of praise. Since the independence of ideals isn’t recognized yet, Power can still be worshiped freely and gain unlimited respect, even as it ruthlessly causes suffering.
But gradually, as morality grows bolder, the claim of the ideal world begins to be felt; and worship, if it is not to cease, must be given to gods of another kind than those created by the savage. Some, though they feel the demands of the ideal, will still consciously reject them, still urging that naked Power is worthy of worship. Such is the attitude inculcated in God's answer to Job out of the whirlwind: the divine power and knowledge are paraded, but of the divine goodness there is no hint. Such also is the attitude of those who, in our own day, base their morality upon the struggle for survival, maintaining that the survivors are necessarily the fittest. But others, not content with an answer so repugnant to the moral sense, will adopt the position which we have become accustomed to regard as specially religious, maintaining that, in some hidden manner, the world of fact is really harmonious with the world of ideals. Thus Man creates God, all-powerful and all-good, the mystic unity of what is and what should be.
But over time, as morality becomes more confident, the idea of an ideal world starts to emerge; and if worship is to continue, it must be directed toward gods of a different nature than those created by primitive beliefs. Some individuals, while recognizing the pull of the ideal, will still deliberately reject it, insisting that raw Power deserves to be worshipped. This is similar to the attitude conveyed in God's response to Job from the whirlwind: divine power and knowledge are showcased, but there’s no suggestion of divine goodness. This reflects the viewpoint of those today who base their morality on the survival of the fittest, arguing that those who survive are naturally the strongest. However, others, unwilling to accept such a morally unsettling answer, will take the position we typically associate with religion, claiming that, in some hidden way, the world of reality is actually in harmony with the world of ideals. In this way, humanity creates a God who is all-powerful and all-good, representing the mystical unity of what is and what should be.
But the world of fact, after all, is not good; and, in submitting our judgment to it, there is an element of slavishness from which our thoughts must be purged. For in all things it is well to exalt the dignity of Man, by freeing him as far as possible from the tyranny of non-human Power. When we have realized that Power is largely bad, that man, with his knowledge of good and evil, is but a helpless atom in a world which has no such knowledge, the choice is again presented to us: Shall we worship Force, or shall we worship Goodness? Shall our God exist and be evil, or shall he be recognized as the creation of our own conscience?
But the world of facts, after all, isn’t good; and by submitting our judgment to it, there’s an element of servitude that we need to eliminate from our thoughts. In everything, it’s important to elevate the dignity of humanity by freeing ourselves as much as possible from the tyranny of non-human Power. Once we realize that Power is mostly bad, and that humans, with their understanding of right and wrong, are just powerless beings in a world that lacks such understanding, we face the question again: Should we worship Force, or should we worship Goodness? Should our God exist and be evil, or should He be acknowledged as a creation of our own conscience?
The answer to this question is very momentous, and affects profoundly our whole morality. The worship of Force, to which Carlyle and Nietzsche and the creed of Militarism have accustomed us, is the result of failure to maintain our own ideals against a hostile universe: it is itself a prostrate submission to evil, a sacrifice of our best to Moloch. If strength indeed is to be respected, let us respect rather the strength of those who refuse that false "recognition of facts" which fails to recognize that facts are often bad. Let us admit that, in the world we know there are many things that would be better otherwise, and that the ideals to which we do and must adhere are not realized in the realm of matter. Let us preserve our respect for truth, for beauty, for the ideal of perfection which life does not permit us to attain, though none of these things meet with the approval of the unconscious universe. If Power is bad, as it seems to be, let us reject it from our hearts. In this lies Man's true freedom: in determination to worship only the God created by our own love of the good, to respect only the heaven which inspires the insight of our best moments. In action, in desire, we must submit perpetually to the tyranny of outside forces; but in thought, in aspiration, we are free, free from our fellow-men, free from the petty planet on which our bodies impotently crawl, free even, while we live, from the tyranny of death. Let us learn, then, that energy of faith which enables us to live constantly in the vision of the good; and let us descend, in action, into the world of fact, with that vision always before us.
The answer to this question is very important and deeply impacts our entire sense of morality. The admiration for Force that thinkers like Carlyle and Nietzsche, along with militaristic beliefs, have instilled in us stems from our failure to uphold our ideals in a challenging world: it amounts to a surrender to evil, sacrificing our best to a false god. If we are to respect strength, let’s respect the strength of those who reject the misleading “recognition of facts” that ignores the fact that many realities are negative. Let’s acknowledge that in the world we live in, many situations could be better, and the ideals we hold onto are not reflected in the physical realm. Let’s keep our respect for truth, beauty, and the ideal of perfection that life doesn’t allow us to achieve, even if none of these things are acknowledged by the indifferent universe. If Power is indeed bad, as it seems, let’s eliminate it from our hearts. This is where true freedom lies: in choosing to worship only the God born from our love for what is good, and to respect only the ideals that uplift us during our best moments. In our actions and desires, we are continuously subject to the control of external forces; but in our thoughts and aspirations, we are free—free from our fellow humans, free from the mundane world we inhabit, and even, while we live, free from the fear of death. Let’s embrace the energy of faith that allows us to maintain a vision of what is good, and let’s engage with the world of reality, always keeping that vision in mind.
When first the opposition of fact and ideal grows fully visible, a spirit of fiery revolt, of fierce hatred of the gods, seems necessary to the assertion of freedom. To defy with Promethean constancy a hostile universe, to keep its evil always in view, always actively hated, to refuse no pain that the malice of Power can invent, appears to be the duty of all who will not bow before the inevitable. But indignation is still a bondage, for it compels our thoughts to be occupied with an evil world; and in the fierceness of desire from which rebellion springs there is a kind of self-assertion which it is necessary for the wise to overcome. Indignation is a submission of our thoughts, but not of our desires; the Stoic freedom in which wisdom consists is found in the submission of our desires, but not of our thoughts. From the submission of our desires springs the virtue of resignation; from the freedom of our thoughts springs the whole world of art and philosophy, and the vision of beauty by which, at last, we half reconquer the reluctant world. But the vision of beauty is possible only to unfettered contemplation, to thoughts not weighted by the load of eager wishes; and thus Freedom comes only to those who no longer ask of life that it shall yield them any of those personal goods that are subject to the mutations of Time.
When the conflict between reality and ideals becomes clear, it seems necessary to have a passionate rebellion and a strong resentment against the gods to assert one’s freedom. To stand up with unwavering determination against a hostile universe, to keep its evils in sight and actively despise them, and to endure any suffering that the malice of power can devise—this seems to be the responsibility of anyone who refuses to surrender to fate. However, anger is still a form of bondage, as it forces our minds to focus on a troubled world; and within the intensity of desire that fuels rebellion lies a kind of self-assertion that the wise must learn to overcome. Anger confines our thoughts but not our desires; the Stoic freedom that wisdom embodies comes from the submission of our desires, not our thoughts. From the humility of our desires emerges the virtue of acceptance; from the liberation of our thoughts springs the entire realm of art and philosophy, and the vision of beauty that ultimately helps us reclaim a reluctant world. Yet, the vision of beauty can only be realized through unencumbered contemplation, through thoughts that are not burdened by eager wishes; thus, true Freedom is attained only by those who no longer demand personal goods from life, which are vulnerable to the changes of time.
Although the necessity of renunciation is evidence of the existence of evil, yet Christianity, in preaching it, has shown a wisdom exceeding that of the Promethean philosophy of rebellion. It must be admitted that, of the things we desire, some, though they prove impossible, are yet real goods; others, however, as ardently longed for, do not form part of a fully purified ideal. The belief that what must be renounced is bad, though sometimes false, is far less often false than untamed passion supposes; and the creed of religion, by providing a reason for proving that it is never false, has been the means of purifying our hopes by the discovery of many austere truths.
Although the need to give things up shows that evil exists, Christianity teaches this in a way that's wiser than the rebellious Promethean philosophy. We must acknowledge that among the things we want, some are real goods, even if they turn out to be impossible to attain; others, no matter how much we yearn for them, don't fit into a completely refined ideal. The belief that what needs to be given up is bad, while sometimes incorrect, is less often wrong than unrestrained passion thinks; and religion, by offering a rationale that it is never truly false, has helped us refine our hopes through the realization of many harsh truths.
But there is in resignation a further good element: even real goods, when they are unattainable, ought not to be fretfully desired. To every man comes, sooner or later, the great renunciation. For the young, there is nothing unattainable; a good thing desired with the whole force of a passionate will, and yet impossible, is to them not credible. Yet, by death, by illness, by poverty, or by the voice of duty, we must learn, each one of us, that the world was not made for us, and that, however beautiful may be the things we crave for, Fate may nevertheless forbid them. It is the part of courage, when misfortune comes, to bear without repining the ruin of our hopes, to turn away our thoughts from vain regrets. This degree of submission to Power is not only just and right: it is the very gate of wisdom.
But there’s something else good about resignation: even real treasures, when they’re out of reach, shouldn’t be desperately craved. Eventually, everyone faces the great act of letting go. For the young, nothing feels unattainable; a good thing desired with all the passion of their will feels real, even if it’s impossible. Yet, through death, illness, poverty, or the call of responsibility, we each learn that the world isn’t designed for us, and that no matter how beautiful our desires may be, Fate can still prevent us from having them. When misfortune strikes, it takes courage to accept the loss of our hopes without complaining and to shift our focus away from pointless regrets. This level of acceptance of a higher power isn’t just fair and right; it’s the very gateway to wisdom.
But passive renunciation is not the whole wisdom; for not by renunciation alone can we build a temple for the worship of our own ideals. Haunting foreshadowings of the temple appear in the realm of imagination, in music, in architecture, in the untroubled kingdom of reason, and in the golden sunset magic of lyrics, where beauty shines and glows, remote from the touch of sorrow, remote from the fear of change, remote from the failures and disenchantments of the world of fact. In the contemplation of these things the vision of heaven will shape itself in our hearts, giving at once a touchstone to judge the world about us, and an inspiration by which to fashion to our needs whatever is not incapable of serving as a stone in the sacred temple.
But passive renunciation isn't the whole answer; we can't create a space to honor our ideals just by giving things up. Glimpses of that space appear in our imagination, in music, in architecture, in the calm realm of reason, and in the enchanting beauty of lyrics, where beauty radiates and shines, untouched by sorrow, unbothered by change, and distant from the failures and disappointments of reality. In reflecting on these things, the vision of heaven will form in our hearts, providing us with a way to measure the world around us and an inspiration to shape whatever can serve as a building block in the sacred space.
Except for those rare spirits that are born without sin, there is a cavern of darkness to be traversed before that temple can be entered. The gate of the cavern is despair, and its floor is paved with the gravestones of abandoned hopes. There Self must die; there the eagerness, the greed of untamed desire must be slain, for only so can the soul be freed from the empire of Fate. But out of the cavern the Gate of Renunciation leads again to the daylight of wisdom, by whose radiance a new insight, a new joy, a new tenderness, shine forth to gladden the pilgrim's heart.
Except for those rare souls born without sin, there’s a dark journey to be made before entering that sacred place. The entrance to this darkness is despair, and its ground is covered with the tombstones of lost hopes. There, the self must perish; there, the eagerness, the greed of wild desire must be put to rest, for it’s the only way to free the soul from the grip of Fate. But from this darkness, the Gate of Renunciation opens back up to the light of wisdom, where a new understanding, a new joy, and a new tenderness shine bright to uplift the pilgrim's heart.
When, without the bitterness of impotent rebellion, we have learnt both to resign ourselves to the outward rule of Fate and to recognize that the non-human world is unworthy of our worship, it becomes possible at last so to transform and refashion the unconscious universe, so to transmute it in the crucible of imagination, that a new image of shining gold replaces the old idol of clay. In all the multiform facts of the world—in the visual shapes of trees and mountains and clouds, in the events of the life of man, even in the very omnipotence of Death—the insight of creative idealism can find the reflection of a beauty which its own thoughts first made. In this way mind asserts its subtle mastery over the thoughtless forces of Nature. The more evil the material with which it deals, the more thwarting to untrained desire, the greater is its achievement in inducing the reluctant rock to yield up its hidden treasures, the prouder its victory in compelling the opposing forces to swell the pageant of its triumph. Of all the arts, Tragedy is the proudest, the most triumphant; for it builds its shining citadel in the very center of the enemy's country, on the very summit of his highest mountain; from its impregnable watch-towers, his camps and arsenals, his columns and forts, are all revealed; within its walls the free life continues, while the legions of Death and Pain and Despair, and all the servile captains of tyrant Fate, afford the burghers of that dauntless city new spectacles of beauty. Happy those sacred ramparts, thrice happy the dwellers on that all-seeing eminence. Honor to those brave warriors who, through countless ages of warfare, have preserved for us the priceless heritage of liberty, and have kept undefiled by sacrilegious invaders the home of the unsubdued.
When we have learned to accept the rules of Fate without the bitterness of pointless rebellion and to understand that the non-human world isn’t worthy of our worship, we can finally reshape and reinvent the unconscious universe. We can transform it in the crucible of imagination so that a new image of shining gold replaces the old idol made of clay. In all the many aspects of the world—in the shapes of trees, mountains, and clouds, in the events of human life, even in the all-powerful presence of Death—the insight of creative idealism can find a reflection of beauty created by its own thoughts. In this way, the mind asserts its subtle control over the thoughtless forces of Nature. The more challenging the material it works with, the more it pushes back against untrained desire, the greater its success in persuading the reluctant rock to reveal its hidden treasures, and the prouder its victory in making opposing forces contribute to its triumph. Among all the arts, Tragedy stands out as the proudest and most victorious; it builds its shining stronghold right in the enemy's territory, at the peak of his highest mountain. From its impenetrable watchtowers, the enemy's camps and arsenals, columns and forts are all exposed; within its walls, life remains free while the legions of Death, Pain, and Despair, along with all the servile captains of tyrant Fate, offer the citizens of that fearless city new showcases of beauty. Blessed are those sacred walls, and thrice blessed are the residents of that all-seeing high ground. Honor to those brave warriors who, through countless ages of struggle, have preserved for us the priceless gift of freedom and have kept the home of the unconquered untouched by sacrilegious invaders.
But the beauty of Tragedy does but make visible a quality which, in more or less obvious shapes, is present always and everywhere in life. In the spectacle of Death, in the endurance of intolerable pain, and in the irrevocableness of a vanished past, there is a sacredness, an overpowering awe, a feeling of the vastness, the depth, the inexhaustible mystery of existence, in which, as by some strange marriage of pain, the sufferer is bound to the world by bonds of sorrow. In these moments of insight, we lose all eagerness of temporary desire, all struggling and striving for petty ends, all care for the little trivial things that, to a superficial view, make up the common life of day by day; we see, surrounding the narrow raft illumined by the flickering light of human comradeship, the dark ocean on whose rolling waves we toss for a brief hour; from the great night without, a chill blast breaks in upon our refuge; all the loneliness of humanity amid hostile forces is concentrated upon the individual soul, which must struggle alone, with what of courage it can command, against the whole weight of a universe that cares nothing for its hopes and fears. Victory, in this struggle with the powers of darkness, is the true baptism into the glorious company of heroes, the true initiation into the overmastering beauty of human existence. From that awful encounter of the soul with the outer world, renunciation, wisdom, and charity are born; and with their birth a new life begins. To take into the inmost shrine of the soul the irresistible forces whose puppets we seem to be—Death and change, the irrevocableness of the past, and the powerlessness of man before the blind hurry of the universe from vanity to vanity—to feel these things and know them is to conquer them.
But the beauty of Tragedy makes visible a quality that is always present in life, whether it's obvious or not. In the spectacle of Death, the endurance of unbearable pain, and the permanence of a lost past, there is a sacredness, an overwhelming awe, a sense of the vastness, the depth, and the endless mystery of existence, in which, through a strange combination of pain, the sufferer is connected to the world by ties of sorrow. In these moments of clarity, we lose all desire for temporary pleasures, all struggles for trivial goals, and all concern for the small, insignificant things that make up everyday life; we see, surrounding the narrow raft lit by the flickering light of human connection, the dark ocean on whose rolling waves we float for just a brief moment; from the great night outside, a cold blast rushes into our refuge; all the loneliness of humanity against hostile forces converges on the individual soul, which must fight alone, with whatever courage it can muster, against the immense weight of a universe that is indifferent to its hopes and fears. Victory in this battle against the forces of darkness is the true initiation into the glorious community of heroes, the real introduction to the overwhelming beauty of human existence. From that terrifying encounter of the soul with the outside world, renunciation, wisdom, and charity are born; and with their arrival, a new life begins. To embrace the powerful forces that we seem to be mere puppets of—Death and change, the permanence of the past, and the helplessness of humanity before the blind rush of the universe from one emptiness to another—to feel and understand these realities is to conquer them.
This is the reason why the Past has such magical power. The beauty of its motionless and silent pictures is like the enchanted purity of late autumn, when the leaves, though one breath would make them fall, still glow against the sky in golden glory. The Past does not change or strive; like Duncan, after life's fitful fever it sleeps well; what was eager and grasping, what was petty and transitory, has faded away, the things that were beautiful and eternal shine out of it like stars in the night. Its beauty, to a soul not worthy of it, is unendurable; but to a soul which has conquered Fate it is the key of religion.
This is why the Past holds such magical power. The beauty of its still and silent images is like the pure charm of late autumn, when the leaves, though a single breath would make them fall, still shine against the sky in golden glory. The Past doesn’t change or struggle; like Duncan, after life's restless fever, it sleeps peacefully. What was eager and greedy, what was small and fleeting, has faded away, and the things that were beautiful and eternal stand out like stars in the night. Its beauty is unbearable to a soul that doesn’t deserve it; but to a soul that has conquered Fate, it is the essence of spirituality.
The life of Man, viewed outwardly, is but a small thing in comparison with the forces of Nature. The slave is doomed to worship Time and Fate and Death, because they are greater than anything he finds in himself, and because all his thoughts are of things which they devour. But, great as they are, to think of them greatly, to feel their passionless splendor, is greater still. And such thought makes us free men; we no longer bow before the inevitable in Oriental subjection, but we absorb it, and make it a part of ourselves. To abandon the struggle for private happiness, to expel all eagerness of temporary desire, to burn with passion for eternal things—this is emancipation, and this is the free man's worship. And this liberation is effected by a contemplation of Fate; for Fate itself is subdued by the mind which leaves nothing to be purged by the purifying fire of Time.
The life of a person, when looked at from the outside, is just a tiny part of the greater forces of Nature. The person stuck in their circumstances is forced to worship Time, Fate, and Death because they are bigger than anything within them, and because all their thoughts revolve around what these forces consume. But, as vast as they are, to really think about them, to feel their unfeeling beauty, is even greater. This kind of thinking makes us free; we no longer submit to the unavoidable like puppets, but we take it in, making it a part of who we are. Letting go of the pursuit of personal happiness, pushing aside fleeting desires, and passionately yearning for timeless things—this is true freedom, and this is the true worship of a free person. And this freedom comes from reflecting on Fate; for Fate itself can be overcome by the mind that has nothing left to be purified by the cleansing fire of Time.
United with his fellow-men by the strongest of all ties, the tie of a common doom, the free man finds that a new vision is with him always, shedding over every daily task the light of love. The life of Man is a long march through the night, surrounded by invisible foes, tortured by weariness and pain, towards a goal that few can hope to reach, and where none may tarry long. One by one, as they march, our comrades vanish from our sight, seized by the silent orders of omnipotent Death. Very brief is the time in which we can help them, in which their happiness or misery is decided. Be it ours to shed sunshine on their path, to lighten their sorrows by the balm of sympathy, to give them the pure joy of a never-tiring affection, to strengthen failing courage, to instil faith in hours of despair. Let us not weigh in grudging scales their merits and demerits, but let us think only of their need—of the sorrows, the difficulties, perhaps the blindnesses, that make the misery of their lives; let us remember that they are fellow-sufferers in the same darkness, actors in the same tragedy with ourselves. And so, when their day is over, when their good and their evil have become eternal by the immortality of the past, be it ours to feel that, where they suffered, where they failed, no deed of ours was the cause; but wherever a spark of the divine fire kindled in their hearts, we were ready with encouragement, with sympathy, with brave words in which high courage glowed.
United with his fellow humans by the strongest bond of all—a shared fate—the free person discovers that a new perspective constantly accompanies them, casting the light of love over every daily task. Human life is a long journey through darkness, surrounded by unseen adversaries, plagued by fatigue and pain, headed toward a destination that few can hope to reach and where no one can stay for long. One by one, as we travel, our companions disappear from view, claimed by the silent commands of all-powerful Death. The time we have to assist them is very brief, during which their happiness or suffering is determined. Let's bring light to their path, ease their sorrows with compassion, offer them the pure joy of unwavering affection, bolster their waning courage, and instill faith in their moments of despair. Let’s not begrudge them by weighing their merits and flaws but focus solely on their needs—the sorrows, challenges, and perhaps the ignorance that contribute to their suffering; let’s remember that they are fellow sufferers in the same darkness, players in the same tragedy as we are. And so, when their time is done, when their good and bad deeds are solidified by the timelessness of the past, let us know that where they suffered, where they stumbled, none of our actions caused it; but wherever the spark of the divine was ignited in their hearts, we were there with encouragement, with empathy, and with uplifting words that radiated courage.
Brief and powerless is Man's life; on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pitiless and dark. Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way; for Man, condemned to-day to lose his dearest, to-morrow himself to pass through the gate of darkness, it remains only to cherish, ere yet the blow falls, the lofty thoughts that ennoble his little day; disdaining the coward terrors of the slave of Fate, to worship at the shrine that his own hands have built; undismayed by the empire of chance, to preserve a mind free from the wanton tyranny that rules his outward life; proudly defiant of the irresistible forces that tolerate, for a moment, his knowledge and his condemnation, to sustain alone, a weary but unyielding Atlas, the world that his own ideals have fashioned despite the trampling march of unconscious power.
Brief and powerless is man’s life; for him and all his kind, the slow, certain doom falls relentlessly and dark. Blind to good and evil, careless of destruction, all-powerful matter rolls on its unstoppable path; for man, doomed today to lose what he holds most dear and tomorrow himself to pass through the gate of darkness, it’s left only to cherish, before the blow falls, the noble thoughts that elevate his brief existence; disregarding the fearful cowardice of those enslaved by fate, to worship at the shrine he has built with his own hands; undeterred by the randomness of life, to keep a mind free from the cruel systems that dictate his external existence; defiantly standing against the overwhelming forces that briefly allow him to hold on to his knowledge and his fate, to carry alone, as a weary but unyielding Atlas, the world that his own ideals have created despite the relentless march of unconscious power.
SOME HISTORIANS
By Philip Guedalla
Philip Guedalla, born 1889, is a London barrister and at the present time an Independent Liberal candidate for the House of Commons. He has written excellent light verse and parodies, and a textbook on European history, 1715-1815. His most conspicuous achievement so far is the brilliant volume Supers and Supermen, from which my selection is taken.
Philip Guedalla, born in 1889, is a London lawyer and currently an Independent Liberal candidate for the House of Commons. He has written outstanding light poetry and parodies, as well as a textbook on European history covering the years 1715-1815. His most notable achievement to date is the brilliant book Supers and Supermen, from which my selection is taken.
Supers and Supermen is a collection of historical and political portraits and skits. It is mercilessly and gloriously humorous. Those who can always follow the wit and irony that Guedalla knows how to conceal in a cunningly turned phrase, will find the book a prodigious delight. He has an unerring eye for the absurd; his paradoxes, when pondered, have a way of proving excellent truth. (Truth is sometimes like the furniture in Through the Looking Glass, which could only be reached by resolutely walking away from it.)
Supers and Supermen is a collection of historical and political portraits and sketches. It's both mercilessly and wonderfully humorous. Those who can keep up with the wit and irony that Guedalla skillfully hides in a cleverly crafted phrase will find the book an incredible delight. He has an uncanny ability to spot the absurd; his paradoxes, when thought about, tend to reveal profound truths. (Truth is occasionally like the furniture in Through the Looking Glass, which can only be reached by confidently walking away from it.)
Ten years ago Mr. Guedalla was considered the most continuously and insolently brilliant undergraduate of the Oxford of that day. The charm and vigor of his ironical wit have not lessened since his fellow-undergraduates strove to convince themselves that no man could be as clever as "P. G." seemed to be. When Mr. Guedalla "holds the mirror up to Nietzsche" or "gives thanks that Britons never never will be Slavs," or dynasticizes Henry James into three reigns: "James I, James II, and the Old Pretender;" or when he speaks of "the cheerful clatter of Sir James Barrie's cans as he went round with the milk of human kindness," there will be some who will sigh; but there will also (I hope) be many who will forgive the bravado for the quicksilver wit.
Ten years ago, Mr. Guedalla was seen as the most consistently and unapologetically brilliant undergraduate at Oxford back then. The charm and energy of his ironic humor haven't faded since his fellow students tried to convince themselves that no one could be as smart as "P. G." appeared to be. When Mr. Guedalla "holds a mirror up to Nietzsche" or "thanks the heavens that Britons will never be Slavs," or categorizes Henry James into three eras: "James I, James II, and the Old Pretender;" or comments on "the cheerful clatter of Sir James Barrie's cans as he delivered the milk of human kindness," some may sigh; but I hope many will overlook the bravado for the sharp wit.
IT was Quintillian or Mr. Max Beerbohm who said, "History repeats itself: historians repeat each other." The saying is full of the mellow wisdom of either writer, and stamped with the peculiar veracity of the Silver Age of Roman or British epigram. One might have added, if the aphorist had stayed for an answer, that history is rather interesting when it repeats itself: historians are not. In France, which is an enlightened country enjoying the benefits of the Revolution and a public examination in rhetoric, historians are expected to write in a single and classical style of French. The result is sometimes a rather irritating uniformity; it is one long Taine that has no turning, and any quotation may be attributed with safety to Guizot, because la nuit tous les chats sont gris. But in England, which is a free country, the restrictions natural to ignorant (and immoral) foreigners are put off by the rough island race, and history is written in a dialect which is not curable by education, and cannot (it would seem) be prevented by injunction.
I was Quintillian or Mr. Max Beerbohm who said, "History repeats itself: historians repeat each other." This saying is full of the wise insights of either writer and marked by the unique truthfulness of the Silver Age of Roman or British wit. One might have added, if the aphorist had stayed for an answer, that history is actually quite interesting when it repeats itself: historians, not so much. In France, an enlightened country benefitting from the Revolution and a public focus on rhetoric, historians are expected to write in a single classical style of French. The result is often a frustrating uniformity; it's one long Taine with no twists, and any quote can safely be attributed to Guizot, because la nuit tous les chats sont gris. But in England, a free country, the constraints typical of ignorant (and immoral) foreigners are shrugged off by the rough islanders, and history is written in a dialect that education can't fix and can't be avoided by injunction.
Historians' English is not a style; it is an industrial disease. The thing is probably scheduled in the Workmen's Compensation Act, and the publisher may be required upon notice of the attack to make a suitable payment to the writer's dependants. The workers in this dangerous trade are required to adopt (like Mahomet's coffin) a detached standpoint—that is, to write as if they took no interest in the subject. Since it is not considered good form for a graduate of less than sixty years' standing to write upon any period that is either familiar or interesting, this feeling is easily acquired, and the resulting narrations present the dreary impartiality of the Recording Angel without that completeness which is the sole attraction of his style. Wilde complained of Mr. Hall Caine that he wrote at the top of his voice; but a modern historian, when he is really detached, writes like some one talking in the next room, and few writers have equaled the legal precision of Coxe's observation that the Turks "sawed the Archbishop and the Commandant in half, and committed other grave violations of international law."
Historians' English isn't just a style; it's an industrial disease. It's probably covered under the Workmen's Compensation Act, and the publisher might have to pay a suitable amount to the writer's dependents when an attack occurs. Those working in this risky field have to adopt a detached perspective—basically, they should write as if they don't care about the subject. Since it's frowned upon for anyone who graduated less than sixty years ago to write about any period that's either relatable or interesting, this mindset is easily adopted. The resulting narratives reflect a dull impartiality similar to that of the Recording Angel, but without the completeness that makes his style appealing. Wilde complained about Mr. Hall Caine writing at the top of his voice; however, a modern historian, when truly detached, writes like someone talking in the next room, and few writers have matched the legal precision of Coxe's remark that the Turks "sawed the Archbishop and the Commandant in half, and committed other serious violations of international law."
Having purged his mind of all unsteadying interest in the subject, the young historian should adopt a moral code of more than Malthusian severity, which may be learned from any American writer of the last century upon the Renaissance or the decadence of Spain. This manner, which is especially necessary in passages dealing with character, will lend to his work the grave dignity that is requisite for translation into Latin prose, that supreme test of an historian's style. It will be his misfortune to meet upon the byways of history the oddest and most abnormal persons, and he should keep by him (unless he wishes to forfeit his Fellowship) some convenient formula by which he may indicate at once the enormity of the subject and the disapproval of the writer. The writings of Lord Macaulay will furnish him at need with the necessary facility in lightning characterization. It was the practice of Cicero to label his contemporaries without distinction as "heavy men," and the characters of history are easily divisible into "far-seeing statesmen" and "reckless libertines." It may be objected that although it is sufficient for the purposes of contemporary caricature to represent Mr. Gladstone as a collar or Mr. Chamberlain as an eye-glass, it is an inadequate record for posterity. But it is impossible for a busy man to write history without formulæ, and after all sheep are sheep and goats are goats. Lord Macaulay once wrote of some one, "In private life he was stern, morose, and inexorable"; he was probably a Dutchman. It is a passage which has served as a lasting model for the historian's treatment of character. I had always imagined that Cliché was a suburb of Paris, until I discovered it to be a street in Oxford. Thus, if the working historian is faced with a period of "deplorable excesses," he handles it like a man, and writes always as if he was illustrated with steel engravings:
Having cleared his mind of any wavering interest in the topic, the young historian should adopt a moral code that goes beyond Malthusian strictness, which can be learned from any American writer of the last century discussing the Renaissance or the decline of Spain. This approach, essential in sections addressing character, will give his work the serious dignity needed for translation into Latin prose, the ultimate test of a historian's style. He will inevitably encounter the quirkiest and most unusual individuals along the historical journey, and he should keep on hand (unless he wants to lose his Fellowship) a handy formula to instantly convey both the seriousness of the subject and his own disapproval. The writings of Lord Macaulay will provide him, when needed, with the ability to create sharp characterizations. Cicero used to label his contemporaries indiscriminately as "heavy men," and historical figures can easily be categorized into "far-sighted statesmen" and "reckless libertines." Some may argue that while it suffices for contemporary caricature to depict Mr. Gladstone as a collar or Mr. Chamberlain as an eye-glass, it doesn’t adequately serve future generations. However, it's impractical for a busy person to write history without formulas, and ultimately, sheep are sheep and goats are goats. Lord Macaulay once described someone as "In private life he was stern, morose, and inexorable"; he was likely Dutch. This passage has remained a lasting model for how historians should approach character. I always thought Cliché was a suburb of Paris until I found out it was a street in Oxford. So, if the working historian comes across a time of "deplorable excesses," he addresses it like a pro and writes as if his work were accompanied by steel engravings:
The imbecile king now ripened rapidly towards a crisis. Surrounded by a Court in which the inanity of the day was rivaled only by the debauchery of the night, he became incapable towards the year 1472 of distinguishing good from evil, a fact which contributed considerably to the effectiveness of his foreign policy, but was hardly calculated to conform with the monastic traditions of his House. Long nights of drink and dicing weakened a constitution that was already undermined, and the council-table, where once Campo Santa had presided, was disfigured with the despicable apparatus of Bagatelle. The burghers of the capital were horrified by the wild laughter of his madcap courtiers, and when it was reported in London that Ladislas had played at Halma the Court of St. James's received his envoy in the deepest of ceremonial mourning.
The foolish king was quickly heading for a crisis. Surrounded by a court where the nonsense of the day was only matched by the partying of the night, he became unable by 1472 to tell right from wrong, which significantly affected his foreign policy but hardly aligned with the monastic traditions of his House. Long nights of drinking and gambling weakened a body that was already in decline, and the council table, once presided over by Campo Santa, was now cluttered with the pathetic tools of Bagatelle. The townspeople were appalled by the raucous laughter of his outrageous courtiers, and when news reached London that Ladislas had played Halma, the Court of St. James's welcomed his envoy in deep ceremonial mourning.
That is precisely how it is done. The passage exhibits the benign and contemporary influences of Lord Macaulay and Mr. Bowdler, and it contains all the necessary ingredients, except perhaps a "venal Chancellor" and a "greedy mistress." Vice is a subject of especial interest to historians, who are in most cases residents in small county towns; and there is unbounded truth in the rococo footnote of a writer on the Renaissance, who said à propos of a Pope: "The disgusting details of his vices smack somewhat of the morbid historian's lamp." The note itself is a fine example of that concrete visualization of the subject which led Macaulay to observe that in consequence of Frederick's invasion of Silesia "black men fought on the coast of Coromandel and red men scalped each other by the Great Lakes of North America."
That’s exactly how it’s done. The passage shows the friendly and modern influences of Lord Macaulay and Mr. Bowdler, and it has all the essential elements, maybe missing just a "corrupt Chancellor" and a "greedy mistress." Vice is a topic that really interests historians, who usually live in small county towns; and there’s a lot of truth in the elaborate footnote of a writer on the Renaissance, who commented about a Pope: "The disgusting details of his vices remind one of the morbid historian's lamp." The note itself is a great example of that vivid visualization of the topic which led Macaulay to note that because of Frederick's invasion of Silesia "black men fought on the coast of Coromandel and red men scalped each other by the Great Lakes of North America."
A less exciting branch of the historian's work is the reproduction of contemporary sayings and speeches. Thus, an obituary should always close on a note of regretful quotation:
A less exciting part of a historian's job is reproducing current sayings and speeches. Therefore, an obituary should always end with a regrettable quote:
He lived in affluence and died in great pain. "Thus," it was said by the most eloquent of his contemporaries, "thus terminated a career as varied as it was eventful, as strange as it was unique."
He lived in wealth and died in severe pain. "So," it was said by the most articulate of his peers, "this is how a career as diverse as it was significant, as bizarre as it was one-of-a-kind, came to an end."
But for the longer efforts of sustained eloquence greater art is required. It is no longer usual, as in Thucydides' day, to compose completely new speeches, but it is permissible for the historian to heighten the colors and even to insert those rhetorical questions and complexes of personal pronouns which will render the translation of the passage into Latin prose a work of consuming interest and lasting profit:
But for longer efforts of sustained eloquence, more skill is needed. It's not common anymore, like it was in Thucydides' time, to create entirely new speeches. However, it's acceptable for the historian to enhance the details and even add rhetorical questions and complex uses of personal pronouns, which will make translating the passage into Latin prose a task of great interest and lasting value:
The Duke assembled his companions for the forlorn hope, and addressed them briefly in oratio obliqua. "His father," he said, "had always cherished in his heart the idea that he would one day return to his own people. Had he fallen in vain? Was it for nothing that they had dyed with their loyal blood the soil of a hundred battlefields? The past was dead, the future was yet to come. Let them remember that great sacrifices were necessary for the attainment of great ends, let them think of their homes and families, and if they had any pity for an exile, an outcast, and an orphan, let them die fighting."
The Duke gathered his friends for the desperate mission and spoke to them briefly in oratio obliqua. "His father," he said, "had always held onto the hope that he would one day return to his people. Did he fall for nothing? Was it all in vain that they stained the soil of a hundred battlefields with their loyal blood? The past is gone, and the future is yet to come. Let them remember that great sacrifices are needed to achieve great goals, let them think of their homes and families, and if they have any compassion for an exile, an outcast, and an orphan, let them fight to the death."
That is the kind of passage that used to send the blood of Dr. Bradley coursing more quickly through his veins. The march of its eloquence, the solemnity of its sentiment, and the rich balance of its pronouns unite to make it a model for all historians: it can be adapted for any period.
That’s the kind of passage that used to make Dr. Bradley’s heart race. The flow of its eloquence, the gravity of its sentiment, and the balanced use of its pronouns come together to make it a benchmark for all historians: it can be applied to any era.
It is not possible in a short review to include the special branches of the subject. Such are those efficient modern text-books, in which events are referred to either as "factors" (as if they were a sum) or as "phases" (as if they were the moon). There is also the solemn business of writing economic history, in which the historian may lapse at will into algebra, and anything not otherwise describable may be called "social tissue." A special subject is constituted by the early conquests of Southern and Central America; in these there is a uniform opening for all passages running:
It’s not possible in a short review to cover the specific branches of the topic. These include the effective modern textbooks, where events are described as either "factors" (like they’re part of an equation) or as "phases" (like they’re relating to the moon). There’s also the formal task of writing economic history, where the historian can freely use algebra, and anything that can’t be described otherwise may just be labeled "social tissue." A specific topic is made up of the early conquests of Southern and Central America; in these, there’s a consistent opportunity for all sections running:
It was now the middle of October, and the season was drawing to an end. Soon the mountains would be whitened with the snows of winter and every rivulet swollen to a roaring torrent. Cortez, whose determination only increased with misfortune, decided to delay his march until the inclemency of the season abated.... It was now the middle of November, and the season was drawing to an end....
It was now the middle of October, and the season was coming to a close. Soon the mountains would be covered in the snows of winter and every stream would swell into a raging torrent. Cortez, whose resolve only grew stronger with challenges, decided to postpone his march until the harshness of the season eased.... It was now the middle of November, and the season was coming to a close....
There is, finally, the method of military history. This may be patriotic, technical, or in the manner prophetically indicated by Virgil as Belloc, horrida Belloc. The finest exponent of the patriotic style is undoubtedly the Rev. W. H. Fitchett, a distinguished colonial clergyman and historian of the Napoleonic wars. His night-attacks are more nocturnal, and his scaling parties are more heroically scaligerous than those of any other writer. His drummer-boys are the most moving in my limited circle of drummer-boys. One gathers that the Peninsular War was full of pleasing incidents of this type:
There is, finally, the method of military history. This can be patriotic, technical, or in the way prophetically suggested by Virgil as Belloc, horrida Belloc. The best example of the patriotic style is definitely Rev. W. H. Fitchett, a notable colonial clergyman and historian of the Napoleonic wars. His night attacks have a more dramatic flair, and his scaling parties are more heroically adventurous than any other writer's. His drummer-boys are the most touching in my limited experience with drummer-boys. It seems that the Peninsular War was full of memorable incidents like this:
The Night Attack
The Night Attack
It was midnight when Staff-Surgeon Pettigrew showed the flare from the summit of Sombrero. At once the whole plain was alive with the hum of the great assault. The four columns speedily got into position with flares and bugles at the head of each. One made straight for the Watergate, a second for the Bailey-guard, a third for the Porter-house, and the last (led by the saintly Smeathe) for the Tube station. Let us follow the second column on its secret mission through the night, lit by torches and cheered on by the huzzas of a thousand English throats. "—— the ——s," cried Cocker in a voice hoarse with patriotism; at that moment a red-hot shot hurtled over the plain and, ricocheting treacherously from the frozen river, dashed the heroic leader to the ground. Captain Boffskin, of the Buffs, leapt up with the dry coughing howl of the British infantryman. "—— them," he roared, "—— them to ——"; and for the last fifty yards it was neck and neck with the ladders. Our gallant drummer-boys laid to again, but suddenly a shot rang out from the silent ramparts. The 94th Léger were awake. We were discovered!
It was midnight when Staff-Surgeon Pettigrew signaled with the flare from the top of Sombrero. Instantly, the entire plain came alive with the buzz of the major assault. The four teams quickly got into position, with flares and bugles leading each group. One headed straight for the Watergate, a second aimed for the Bailey-guard, a third for the Porter-house, and the last (led by the noble Smeathe) targeted the Tube station. Let’s follow the second team on its secret mission through the night, illuminated by torches and cheered on by the shouts of a thousand English voices. "—— the ——s," shouted Cocker in a voice raspy from patriotism; at that moment, a red-hot shot flew over the plain and, bouncing dangerously off the frozen river, knocked the brave leader to the ground. Captain Boffskin of the Buffs jumped up with the dry, coughing shout typical of British infantrymen. "—— them," he yelled, "—— them to ——"; and for the last fifty yards, it was a dead heat with the ladders. Our courageous drummer-boys got back to it, but suddenly a shot rang out from the quiet ramparts. The 94th Léger were awake. We've been discovered!
The war of 1870 requires more special treatment. Its histories show no particular characteristic, but its appearance in fiction deserves special attention. There is a standard pattern.
The war of 1870 needs more specific attention. Its histories don’t show any particular traits, but its depiction in fiction should be highlighted. There is a common pattern.
How the Prussians Came To Guitry-le-sec
How the Prussians Came to Guitry-le-sec
It was a late afternoon in early September, or an early afternoon in late September—I forget these things—when I missed the boat express from Kerplouarnec to Pouzy-le-roi and was forced by the time-table to spend three hours at the forgotten hamlet of Guitry-le-sec, in the heart of Dauphiné. It contained besides a quantity of underfed poultry one white church, one white mairie, and nine white houses. An old man with a white beard came towards me up the long white road. "It was on just such an afternoon as this forty years ago," he began, "that...."
It was a late afternoon in early September, or an early afternoon in late September—I can't remember these things—when I missed the express boat from Kerplouarnec to Pouzy-le-roi and had to spend three hours in the forgotten little village of Guitry-le-sec, in the heart of Dauphiné. It had a bunch of underfed chickens, one white church, one white town hall, and nine white houses. An old man with a white beard walked towards me along the long white road. "It was on just such an afternoon as this forty years ago," he started, "that...."
"Stop!" I said sharply. "I have met you in a previous existence. You are going to say that a solitary Uhlan appeared sharply outlined against the sky behind M. Jules' farm." He nodded feebly.
"Stop!" I said firmly. "We've crossed paths in another life. You're about to mention that a lone Uhlan stood out clearly against the sky behind M. Jules' farm." He nodded weakly.
"The red trousers had left the village half an hour before to look for the hated Prussian in the cafés of the neighboring town. You were alone when the spiked helmets marched in. You can hear their shrieking fifes to this day." He wept quietly.
"The red trousers had left the village half an hour earlier to search for the hated Prussian in the cafés of the nearby town. You were alone when the spiked helmets marched in. You can still hear their screeching fifes today." He cried softly.
In the first of the three cafés I saw a second old man. "Come in, Monsieur," he said. I waited on the doorstep. "It was on just such an afternoon...." I went on. At the other two cafés two further old men attempted me with the story; I told the last that he was rescued by Zouaves, and walked happily to the station, to read about Vichy Célestins until the train came in from the south.
In the first of the three cafés, I saw another old man. "Come in, Sir," he said. I paused at the door. "It was on just such an afternoon...." I continued. At the other two cafés, two more old men tried to tell me their stories; I told the last one that he was rescued by Zouaves and happily walked to the station, ready to read about Vichy Célestins until the train arrived from the south.
The Russo-Japanese War is a more original subject and derives its particular flavor from the airy grace with which Sir Ian Hamilton has described it. Like this:
The Russo-Japanese War is a unique topic and gets its special character from the elegant way Sir Ian Hamilton has portrayed it. Like this:
Wao-wao, Jan. 31.—The rafale was purring like a mistral as I shaved this morning. I wonder where it is; must ask ——. —— is a charming fellow with the face of a Baluchi Kashgai and a voice like a circular saw.
Wow-wow, Jan. 31.—The rafale was humming like a mistral while I was shaving this morning. I wonder where it is; I should ask ——. —— is a great guy with the face of a Baluchi Kashgai and a voice like a circular saw.
11:40—It was eleven-forty when I looked at my watch. The shrapnel-bursts look like a plantation of powder-puffs suspended in the sky. Victor says there is a battle going on: capital chap Victor.
11:40—It was 11:40 when I checked my watch. The shrapnel explosions look like a field of cotton candy floating in the sky. Victor says there’s a battle happening: classy guy Victor.
7 P. M.—A great day. It was Donkelsdorp over again. Substitute the Tenth Army for the Traffordshire's baggage wagon, swell Honks Spruit into the roaring Wang-ho, elevate Oom Kop into the frowning scarp of Pyjiyama, and you have it. The Staff were obviously gratified when I told them about Donkelsdorp.
7 P. M.—A fantastic day. It felt like Donkelsdorp all over again. Just swap the Tenth Army for the Traffordshire's supply wagon, turn Honks Spruit into the powerful Wang-ho, and raise Oom Kop into the intimidating cliff of Pyjiyama, and that's it. The Staff clearly felt pleased when I shared the news about Donkelsdorp.
The Rooskis came over the crest-line in a huddle of massed battalions, and Gazeka was after them like a rat after a terrier. I knew that his horse-guns had no horses (a rule of the Japanese service to discourage unnecessary changing of ground), but his men bit the trails and dragged them up by their teeth. Slowly the Muscovites peeled off the steaming mountain and took the funicular down the other side.
The Russians came over the ridge in a line of tightly packed troops, and Gazeka was after them like a rat chasing a terrier. I knew that his horse artillery didn’t have any horses (a rule in the Japanese army to discourage unnecessary movements), but his men bit the trails and hauled them up with their teeth. Slowly the Russians peeled away from the steaming mountain and took the cable car down the other side.
I wonder what my friend Smuts would make of the Yen-tai coal mine? Well, well.—"Something accomplished, something done."
I wonder what my friend Smuts would think of the Yen-tai coal mine? Well, well.—"Something accomplished, something done."
The technical manner is more difficult of acquisition for the beginner, since it involves a knowledge of at least two European languages. It is (a) cardinal rule that all places should be described as points d'appui, the simple process of scouting looks far better as Verschleierung, and the adjective "strategical" may be used without any meaning in front of any noun.
The technical approach is harder for beginners to grasp because it requires knowing at least two European languages. It's a cardinal rule that all locations should be referred to as points d'appui, the straightforward process of scouting is much better described as Verschleierung, and the term "strategical" can be used without any real meaning in front of any noun.
But the military manner was revolutionized by the war. Mr. Belloc created a new Land and a new Water. We know now why the Persian commanders demanded "earth and water" on their entrance into a Greek town; it was the weekly demand of the Great General Staff, as it called for its favorite paper. Mr. Belloc has woven Baedeker and geometry into a new style: it is the last cry of historians' English, because one was invented by a German and the other by a Greek.
But the way the military operated changed dramatically because of the war. Mr. Belloc created a new way of looking at land and a new approach to water. Now we understand why the Persian commanders asked for "earth and water" when they entered a Greek city; it was like the weekly request of the Great General Staff when they wanted their preferred report. Mr. Belloc blended travel guides and geometry into a fresh style: it’s the latest trend in historians' English, since one was developed by a German and the other by a Greek.
WINTER MIST
By Robert Palfrey Utter
Robert Palfrey Utter was born in 1875, in Olympia, Washington. He graduated from Harvard (I am sorry there are so many Harvard men in this book: I didn't know they were Harvard men until too late) in 1898 and took his Ph.D. there in 1906. After a varied experience, including editorial work on the Youth's Companion, reporting on the New York Evening Post, ranching in Mexico and graduate study at Harvard, he went to Amherst, 1906-18, as associate professor of English. He was on the faculty of the A. E. F. University at Beaune, France, 1919; and in 1920 became associate professor of English at the University of California.
Robert Palfrey Utter was born in 1875 in Olympia, Washington. He graduated from Harvard (sorry for all the Harvard alums in this book—I didn't realize they were Harvard people until it was too late) in 1898 and earned his Ph.D. there in 1906. After a diverse career that included editorial work for the Youth's Companion, reporting for the New York Evening Post, ranching in Mexico, and graduate studies at Harvard, he joined the faculty at Amherst from 1906 to 1918 as an associate professor of English. He was also on the faculty of the A.E.F. University in Beaune, France, in 1919, and in 1920, he became an associate professor of English at the University of California.
Mr. Utter has contributed largely to the magazines, and has published Guide to Good English (1914), Every-Day Words and Their Uses (1916), and Every-Day Pronunciation (1918).
Mr. Utter has made significant contributions to magazines and has published Guide to Good English (1914), Every-Day Words and Their Uses (1916), and Every-Day Pronunciation (1918).
Former students of his at Amherst have told me of the lasting stimulus his teaching has given them: that he can beautifully practise what he preaches of the art of writing, this essay shows.
Former students of his at Amherst have shared with me how his teaching has had a lasting impact on them: that he is able to wonderfully demonstrate what he teaches about the art of writing, as this essay illustrates.
FROM a magazine with a rather cynical cover I learned very recently that for pond skating the proper costume is brown homespun with a fur collar on the jacket, whereas for private rinks one wears a gray herringbone suit and taupe-colored alpine. Oh, barren years that I have been a skater, and no one told me of this! And here's another thing. I was patiently trying to acquire a counter turn under the idle gaze of a hockey player who had no better business till the others arrived than to watch my efforts. "What I don't see about that game," he said at last, "is who wins?" It had never occurred to me to ask. He looked bored, and I remembered that the pictures in the magazine showed the wearers of the careful costumes for rink and pond skating as having rather blank eyes that looked illimitably bored. I have hopes of the "rocker" and the "mohawk"; I might acquire a proper costume for skating on a small river if I could learn what it is; but a bored look—why, even hockey does not bore me, unless I stop to watch it. I don't wonder that those who play it look bored. Even Alexander, who played a more imaginative game than hockey, was bored—poor fellow, he should have taken up fancy skating in his youth; I never heard of a human being who pretended to a complete conquest of it.
FROM a magazine with a pretty cynical cover, I just found out that for pond skating, the right outfit is a brown homespun jacket with a fur collar, while for private rinks, you wear a gray herringbone suit and taupe-colored alpine. Oh, the wasted years I’ve spent skating, and no one ever told me this! Here’s another thing: I was patiently trying to master a counter turn under the indifferent gaze of a hockey player, who had nothing better to do until the others showed up than to watch me struggle. "What I don’t get about that game," he finally said, "is who wins?" It never occurred to me to ask. He looked bored, and I remembered that the pictures in the magazine showed people in these fancy outfits for rink and pond skating, all with rather blank expressions and an air of endless boredom. I have hopes of mastering the "rocker" and the "mohawk"; I might pick up the right outfit for skating on a small river if only I could find out what it is; but a bored look—well, even hockey doesn’t bore me, unless I stop to watch. I can’t blame those who play it for looking bored. Even Alexander, who played a more imaginative game than hockey, was bored—poor guy, he should have taken up fancy skating when he was younger; I’ve never heard of anyone who claimed to have fully mastered it.
I like pond skating best by moonlight. The hollow among the hills will always have a bit of mist about it, let the sky be clear as it may. The moonlight, which seems so lucid and brilliant when you look up, is all pearl and smoke round the pond and the hills. The shore that was like iron under your heel as you came down to the ice is vague, when you look back at it from the center of the pond, as the memory of a dream. The motion is like flying in a dream; you float free and the world floats under you; your velocity is without effort and without accomplishment, for, speed as you may, you leave nothing behind and approach nothing. You look upward. The mist is overhead now; you see the moon in a "hollow halo" at the bottom of an "icy crystal cup," and you yourself are in just such another. The mist, palely opalescent, drives past her out of nothing into nowhere. Like yourself, she is the center of a circle of vague limit and vaguer content, where passes a swift, ceaseless stream of impression through a faintly luminous halo of consciousness.
I love pond skating most by moonlight. The hollow in the hills always has a bit of mist around it, no matter how clear the sky is. The moonlight, which looks so clear and bright when you look up, appears all pearly and smoky around the pond and the hills. The shore, which felt like iron under your feet as you walked down to the ice, seems vague when you look back at it from the center of the pond, like a memory of a dream. The movement feels like flying in a dream; you float freely and the world floats beneath you; your speed is effortless and unachieved, because no matter how fast you go, you leave nothing behind and you’re not getting any closer to anything. You look up. The mist is above you now; you see the moon in a "hollow halo" at the bottom of an "icy crystal cup," and you’re in a similar one. The mist, faintly opalescent, moves past her from nothing into nowhere. Like you, she is the center of a circle with an unclear boundary and even less defined content, through which a swift, endless stream of impressions flows within a subtly glowing halo of awareness.
If by moonlight the mist plays upon the emotions like faint, bewitching music, in sunlight it is scarcely less. More often than not when I go for my skating to our cosy little river, a winding mile from the mill-dam to the railroad trestle, the hills are clothed in silver mist which frames them in vignettes with blurred edges. The tone is that of Japanese paintings on white silk, their color showing soft and dull through the frost-powder with which the air is filled. At the mill-dam the hockey players furiously rage together, but I heed them not, and in a moment am beyond the first bend, where their clamor comes softened on the air like that of a distant convention of politic crows. The silver powder has fallen on the ice, just enough to cover earlier tracings and leave me a fresh plate to etch with grapevines and arabesques. The stream winds ahead like an unbroken road, striped across with soft-edged shadows of violet, indigo, and lavender. On one side it is bordered with leaning birch, oak, maple, hickory, and occasional groups of hemlocks under which the very air seems tinged with green. On the other, rounded masses of scrub oak and alder roll back from the edge of the ice like clouds of reddish smoke. The river narrows and turns, then spreads into a swamp, where I weave my curves round the straw-colored tussocks. Here, new as the snow is, there are earlier tracks than mine. A crow has traced his parallel hieroglyph, alternate footprints with long dashes where he trailed his middle toe as he lifted his foot and his spur as he brought it down. Under a low shrub that has hospitably scattered its seed is a dainty, close-wrought embroidery of tiny bird feet in irregular curves woven into a circular pattern. A silent glide towards the bank, where among bare twigs little forms flit and swing with low conversational notes, brings me in company with a working crew of pine siskins, methodically rifling seed cones of birch and alder, chattering sotto voce the while. Under a leaning hemlock the writing on the snow tells of a squirrel that dropped from the lowest branch, hopped aimlessly about for a few yards, then went up the bank. Farther on, where the river narrows again, a flutter-headed rabbit crossing at top speed has made a line seemingly as free from frivolous indirection as if it had been defined by all the ponderosities of mathematics. There is no pursuing track; was it his own shadow he fled, or the shadow of hawk?
If the mist dances on emotions like soft, enchanting music under the moonlight, it’s almost just as captivating in sunlight. Most of the time when I go skating on our cozy little river, which winds a mile from the mill dam to the railroad trestle, the hills are wrapped in silver mist, giving them a blurred, vignette-like appearance. The scene resembles Japanese paintings on white silk, their colors appearing soft and muted through the frost in the air. At the mill dam, the hockey players passionately clash, but I pay them no mind and soon find myself past the first bend, where their noise fades into the background like a distant gathering of cawing crows. The silver powder has settled on the ice, just enough to cover earlier marks and give me a fresh canvas to sketch out grapevines and swirling designs. The stream flows ahead like a smooth road, striped with soft-edged shadows of violet, indigo, and lavender. On one side, it's lined with leaning birch, oak, maple, hickory, and occasional clusters of hemlocks, where the very air feels tinged with green. On the other side, rounded patches of scrub oak and alder roll back from the ice's edge like clouds of reddish smoke. The river narrows and bends, then expands into a swamp, where I carve my path around the straw-colored tussocks. Even though the snow is new, there are tracks here older than mine. A crow has etched his parallel symbols, leaving alternating footprints with long lines where he trailed his middle toe when lifting his foot and his spur as he set it down. Under a low shrub that has scattered its seeds, a delicate, intricate pattern of tiny bird feet weaves into a circular design. As I glide silently toward the bank, where little forms flit and swing among bare twigs while sharing quiet conversations, I join a group of pine siskins, methodically searching birch and alder cones for seeds, chirping softly in the process. Under a leaning hemlock, the markings in the snow indicate a squirrel that dropped from the lowest branch, wandered aimlessly for a few yards, then ascended the bank. Further along, where the river narrows again, a speedy rabbit has left a line that appears as direct and intentional as if it had been drawn with mathematical precision. There are no pursuit tracks; was it his own shadow he fled from, or the shadow of a hawk?
The mist now lies along the base of the hills, leaving the upper ridges almost imperceptibly veiled and the rounded tops faintly softened. The snowy slopes are etched with brush and trees so fine and soft that they remind me of Dürer's engravings, the fur of Saint Jerome's lion, the cock's feathers in the coat of arms with the skull. From behind the veil of the southernmost hill comes a faint note as
The mist now rests at the base of the hills, gently covering the upper ridges and softly blurring the rounded tops. The snowy slopes are marked by delicate brush and trees that are so fine and soft they remind me of Dürer's engravings, like the fur of Saint Jerome's lion and the feathers of the rooster on the coat of arms with the skull. From behind the haze of the southernmost hill, a faint sound comes as
From undiscoverable lips that blow
An immaterial horn.
From hidden lips that blow
An intangible horn.
It is the first far premonition of the noon train; I pause and watch long for the next sign. At last I hear its throbbing, which ceases as it pauses at the flag station under the hill. There the invisible locomotive shoots a column of silver vapor above the surface of the mist, breaking in rounded clouds at the top, looking like nothing so much as the photograph of the explosion of a submarine mine, a titanic outburst of force in static pose, a geyser of atomized water standing like a frosted elm tree. Then quick puffs of dusky smoke, the volley of which does not reach my ear till the train has stuck its black head out of fairyland and become a prosaic reminder of dinner. High on its narrow trestle it leaps across my little river and disappears between the sandbanks. Far behind it the mist is again spreading into its even layers. Silence is renewed, and I can hear the musical creaking of four starlings in an apple tree as they eviscerate a few rotten apples on the upper branches. I turn and spin down the curves and reaches of the river without delaying for embroideries or arabesques. At the mill-dam the hockey game still rages; the players take no heed of the noon train.
It's the first distant hint of the noon train; I stop and look for the next sign. Finally, I hear its throbbing, which stops as it halts at the flag station below the hill. There, the unseen locomotive sends up a burst of silver vapor above the mist, breaking into rounded clouds at the top, resembling nothing more than a photograph of a submarine mine explosion, a massive outburst of energy frozen in place, a spray of fine water standing like a frosted elm tree. Then quick puffs of dark smoke, the sound of which reaches me only after the train has poked its black head out of some fairyland and become a straightforward reminder of dinner. High on its narrow trestle, it jumps across my little river and vanishes between the sandbanks. Far behind it, the mist is spreading into its smooth layers again. Silence returns, and I can hear the musical creaking of four starlings in an apple tree as they pick at a few rotten apples on the upper branches. I turn and glide down the curves and bends of the river without stopping for embellishments or fancy details. At the mill dam, the hockey game still rages; the players pay no attention to the noon train.
Let Zal and Rustum boast as much as they want, |
Or Hatim's dinner invitation.... |
Their minds and eyes are intent on a battered disk of hard rubber. I begin to think I have misjudged them when I consider what effort of imagination must be involved in the concentration of the faculties on such an object, transcending the call of hunger and the lure of beauty. Is it to them as is to the mystic "the great syllable Om" whereby he attains Nirvana? I cannot attain it; I can but wonder what the hockey players win one-half so precious as the stuff they miss.
Their minds and eyes are focused on a worn-out disk of hard rubber. I start to think I’ve misjudged them when I consider the level of imagination needed to concentrate so fully on such an object, ignoring hunger and the appeal of beauty. Is it to them what the mystic sees in "the great syllable Om," a way to reach enlightenment? I can't understand it; I can only wonder what the hockey players value even half as much as what they’re missing.
TRIVIA
By Logan Pearsall Smith
It would be extravagant to claim that Pearsall Smith's Trivia, the remarkable little book from which these miniature essays are extracted, is well known: it is too daintily, fragile and absurd and sophisticated to appeal to a very large public. But it has a cohort of its own devotees and fanatics, and since its publication in 1917 it has become a sort of password in a secret brotherhood or intellectual Suicide Club. I say suicide advisedly, for Mr. Smith's irony is glitteringly edged. Its incision is so keen that the reader is often unaware the razor edge has turned against himself until he perceives the wound to be fatal.
It would be over the top to say that Pearsall Smith's Trivia, the amazing little book from which these short essays are taken, is well known: it's too delicate, fragile, absurd, and sophisticated to attract a large audience. However, it has its own group of passionate fans, and since its release in 1917, it has become a kind of secret password among a brotherhood or intellectual Suicide Club. I use the term "suicide" deliberately, as Mr. Smith's irony is sharply pointed. Its cut is so precise that the reader often doesn’t realize the razor's edge has turned against them until they see the wound is deadly.
Pearsall Smith was, in a way, one of the Men of the Nineties. But he had Repressions—(an excellent thing to have, brothers. Most of the great literature is founded on judicious repressions). He came of an excellent old intellectual Quaker family down in the Philadelphia region. His father (if we remember rightly) was one of Walt Whitman's staunchest friends in the Camden days. But when the strong wine of the Nineties was foaming in the vats and noggins, Mr. Smith (so we imagine it, at least) was still too close to that "guarded education in morals and manners" that he had had at Haverford College, Pennsylvania (and further tinctured with docility at Harvard and Balliol) to give full rein to his inward gush of hilarious satirics. Like a Strong Silent Man he held in that wellspring of champagne and mercury until many many years later. When it came out (in 1902 he first began to print his Trivia, privately; the book was published by Doubleday in 1917) it sparkled all the more tenderly for its long cellarage.
Pearsall Smith was, in a way, one of the Men of the Nineties. But he had Repressions—(a great thing to have, folks. Most great literature is built on careful repressions). He came from an esteemed old intellectual Quaker family in the Philadelphia area. His father (if we remember correctly) was one of Walt Whitman's closest friends during the Camden years. But when the vibrant spirit of the Nineties was brewing, Mr. Smith (at least that's how we picture it) was still too influenced by that "guarded education in morals and manners" he received at Haverford College, Pennsylvania (and further shaped by docility at Harvard and Balliol) to fully express his inner flow of humorous satire. Like a Strong Silent Man, he kept that wellspring of creativity bottled up until many years later. When it finally emerged (in 1902 he started printing his Trivia privately; the book was published by Doubleday in 1917), it sparkled even more beautifully for its long aging.
But we must be statistical. Logan Pearsall Smith was born at Melville, N. J., in 1865. As a boy he lived in Philadelphia and Germantown (do you know Germantown? it is a foothill of that mountain range whereof Parnassus and Olivet are twin peaks) and was three years at Haverford in the class of '85. He went to Harvard for a year, then to Balliol College, Oxford, where he took his degree in 1893. Ever since then, eheu, he has lived in England.
But we need to be factual. Logan Pearsall Smith was born in Melville, N.J., in 1865. As a kid, he lived in Philadelphia and Germantown (do you know Germantown? It’s a foothill of that mountain range where Parnassus and Olivet are twin peaks) and spent three years at Haverford, graduating in the class of '85. He attended Harvard for a year before going to Balliol College, Oxford, where he earned his degree in 1893. Since then, unfortunately, he has lived in England.
Stonehenge
Stonehenge
In the bright center and sunlight I leap, I caper, I dance my dance; but when I look up, I see they are not deceived. For nothing ever placates them, nothing ever moves to a look of approval that ring of bleak, old, contemptuous Faces.
In the bright center and sunlight I jump, I frolic, I dance my dance; but when I look up, I see they aren’t fooled. Because nothing ever satisfies them, nothing ever brings a look of approval from that circle of cold, old, scornful faces.
The Stars
The Stars
Battling my way homeward one dark night against the wind and rain, a sudden gust, stronger than the others, drove me back into the shelter of a tree. But soon the Western sky broke open; the illumination of the Stars poured down from behind the dispersing clouds.
Struggling to get home one dark night through the wind and rain, a sudden gust, stronger than the others, pushed me back under a tree for cover. But soon the Western sky cleared up; the light from the stars shone down as the clouds parted.
I was astonished at their brightness, to see how they filled the night with their soft lustre. So I went my way accompanied by them; Arcturus followed me, and becoming entangled in a leafy tree, shone by glimpses, and then emerged triumphant, Lord of the Western Sky. Moving along the road in the silence of my own footsteps, my thoughts were among the Constellations. I was one of the Princes of the starry Universe; in me also there was something that was not insignificant and mean and of no account.
I was amazed by their brightness, seeing how they lit up the night with their soft glow. So I continued on my way, accompanied by them; Arcturus followed me, getting caught in a leafy tree, shining in flashes before breaking free, the King of the Western Sky. As I walked down the road, my footsteps were silent and my thoughts were among the Constellations. I felt like one of the Princes of the starry Universe; there was something in me that was not unimportant or trivial or of no value.
The Spider
The Spider
What shall I compare it to, this fantastic thing I call my Mind? To a waste-paper basket, to a sieve choked with sediment, or to a barrel full of floating froth and refuse?
What should I compare this amazing thing I call my Mind to? A trash can, a sieve filled with gunk, or a barrel overflowing with useless fluff and debris?
No, what it is really most like is a spider's web, insecurely hung on leaves and twigs, quivering in every wind, and sprinkled with dewdrops and dead flies. And at its center, pondering for ever the Problem of Existence, sits motionless the spider-like and uncanny Soul.
No, what it really resembles most is a spider's web, precariously hung on leaves and twigs, trembling with every breeze, and dotted with dewdrops and dead flies. And at its center, endlessly contemplating the Problem of Existence, sits the spider-like and eerie Soul, motionless.
L'Oiseau Bleu
The Blue Bird
What is it, I have more than once asked myself, what is it that I am looking for in my walks about London? Sometimes it seems to me as if I were following a Bird, a bright Bird that sings sweetly as it floats about from one place to another.
What is it, I’ve asked myself more than once, that I’m searching for during my walks around London? Sometimes it feels like I’m chasing a Bird, a vibrant Bird that sings beautifully as it moves from one spot to another.
When I find myself, however, among persons of middle age and settled principles, see them moving regularly to their offices—what keeps them going? I ask myself. And I feel ashamed of myself and my Bird.
When I find myself around middle-aged people with established beliefs, watching them head to their offices every day—what drives them? I wonder. And I feel ashamed of myself and my Bird.
There is though a Philosophic Doctrine—I studied it at College, and I know that many serious people believe it—which maintains that all men, in spite of appearances and pretensions, all live alike for Pleasure. This theory certainly brings portly, respected persons very near to me. Indeed, with a sense of low complicity, I have sometimes watched a Bishop. Was he, too, on the hunt for Pleasure, solemnly pursuing his Bird?
There is a philosophical idea—I studied it in college, and I know many serious people believe it—that suggests all men, regardless of how they seem or what they claim, ultimately live for pleasure. This theory really makes me feel closer to those hefty, respected individuals. In fact, with a sense of guilty complicity, I've sometimes observed a bishop. Was he too out there chasing pleasure, solemnly pursuing his goal?
I See the World
I See the World
"But you go nowhere, see nothing of the world," my cousins said.
"But you don't go anywhere, you don't see anything of the world," my cousins said.
Now though I do go sometimes to the parties to which I am now and then invited, I find, as a matter of fact, that I get really much more pleasure by looking in at windows, and have a way of my own of seeing the World. And of summer evenings, when motors hurry through the late twilight, and the great houses take on airs of inscrutable expectation, I go owling out through the dusk; and wandering toward the West, lose my way in unknown streets—an unknown City of revels. And when a door opens and a bediamonded Lady moves to her motor over carpets unrolled by powdered footmen, I can easily think her some great Courtezan, or some half-believed Duchess, hurrying to card-tables and lit candles and strange scenes of joy. I like to see that there are still splendid people on this flat earth; and at dances, standing in the street with the crowd, and stirred by the music, the lights, the rushing sound of voices, I think the Ladies as beautiful as Stars who move up those lanes of light past our rows of vagabond faces; the young men look like Lords in novels; and if (it has once or twice happened) people I know go by me, they strike me as changed and rapt beyond my sphere. And when on hot nights windows are left open, and I can look in at Dinner Parties, as I peer through lace curtains and window-flowers at the silver, the women's shoulders, the shimmer of their jewels, and the divine attitudes of their heads as they lean and listen, I imagine extraordinary intrigues and unheard-of wines and passions.
Now, even though I sometimes go to the parties I’m invited to, I actually get a lot more enjoyment from just looking in at windows, and I have my own way of experiencing the world. On summer evenings, when cars rush through the dimming twilight and the big houses seem to hold a mysterious anticipation, I wander out into the dusk; drifting toward the West, I get lost in unfamiliar streets—a hidden city of celebration. When a door opens and a glamorous lady steps into her car over carpets unfurled by powdered footmen, I can easily imagine her as a great courtesan or a half-forgotten duchess racing off to card games, lit candles, and bizarre scenes of joy. I love seeing that there are still extraordinary people on this plain earth; at dances, standing on the street with the crowd and swept up by the music, the lights, and the clamoring voices, I think the ladies are as beautiful as stars making their way up those lanes of light past our row of wandering faces; the young men look like lords from novels; and if (it has happened once or twice) people I know walk past me, they seem changed and lifted beyond my world. And on hot nights when windows are left open, and I can peek in at dinner parties, as I glance through lace curtains and flower arrangements at the silverware, the women’s shoulders, the sparkle of their jewelry, and the graceful postures of their heads as they lean in and listen, I imagine incredible intrigues and exceptional wines and passions.
The Church of England
The Church of England
I have my Anglican moments; and as I sat there that Sunday afternoon, in the Palladian interior of the London Church, and listened to the unexpressive voices chanting the correct service, I felt a comfortable assurance that we were in no danger of being betrayed into any unseemly manifestations of religious fervor. We had not gathered together at that performance to abase ourselves with furious hosannas before any dark Creator of an untamed Universe, no Deity of freaks and miracles and sinister hocus-pocus; but to pay our duty to a highly respected Anglican First Cause—undemonstrative, gentlemanly, and conscientious—whom, without loss of self-respect, we could decorously praise.
I have my Anglican moments; and as I sat there that Sunday afternoon, in the elegant interior of the London Church, and listened to the monotone voices reciting the proper service, I felt a comforting assurance that we were in no danger of being swept up in any improper displays of religious enthusiasm. We hadn’t come together at that service to humble ourselves with intense praises before some dark Creator of a wild Universe, no Deity of oddities and miracles and mysterious tricks; but to show our respect to a highly regarded Anglican First Cause—unassuming, gentlemanly, and responsible—whom, without compromising our self-respect, we could praise in a proper manner.
Consolation
Comfort
The other day, depressed on the Underground, I tried to cheer myself by thinking over the joys of our human lot. But there wasn't one of them for which I seemed to care a button—not Wine, nor Friendship, nor Eating, nor Making Love, nor the Consciousness of Virtue. Was it worth while then going up in a lift into a world that had nothing less trite to offer?
The other day, feeling down on the subway, I tried to lift my spirits by thinking about the joys of being human. But honestly, none of them seemed to matter to me—not wine, not friendship, not eating, not making love, and not even feeling virtuous. Was it really worth it to go up in a lift into a world that had nothing less cliché to offer?
Then I thought of reading—the nice and subtle happiness of reading. This was enough, this joy not dulled by Age, this polite and unpunished vice, this selfish, serene, life-long intoxication.
Then I thought about reading—the pleasant and delicate joy of reading. This was enough, this happiness untouched by Age, this polite and unpunished indulgence, this selfish, calm, lifelong high.
The Kaleidoscope
The Kaleidoscope
I find in my mind, in its miscellany of ideas and musings, a curious collection of little landscapes and pictures, shining and fading for no reason. Sometimes they are views in no way remarkable—the corner of a road, a heap of stones, an old gate. But there are many charming pictures too: as I read, between my eyes and book, the Moon sheds down on harvest fields her chill of silver; I see autumnal avenues, with the leaves falling, or swept in heaps; and storms blow among my thoughts, with the rain beating for ever on the fields. Then Winter's upward glare of snow appears; or the pink and delicate green of Spring in the windy sunshine; or cornfields and green waters, and youths bathing in Summer's golden heats.
I discover in my mind, with its mix of thoughts and reflections, a fascinating collection of little scenes and images, glowing and fading for no apparent reason. Sometimes they are completely ordinary sights—a road corner, a pile of stones, an old gate. But there are also many beautiful images: as I read, the Moon casts its cool silver light over the harvest fields; I see autumn pathways, with leaves dropping or gathered in piles; and storms swirl through my thoughts, with rain continuously pounding on the fields. Then there's Winter's bright glare of snow; or the soft pink and green of Spring in the breezy sunshine; or golden summer days with cornfields and green waters, where young people swim in the sun's heat.
And as I walk about, certain places haunt me; a cathedral rises above a dark blue foreign town, the color of ivory in the sunset light; now I find myself in a French garden, full of lilacs and bees, and shut-in sunshine, with the Mediterranean lounging and washing outside its walls; now in a little college library, with busts, and the green reflected light of Oxford lawns—and again I hear the bells, reminding me of the familiar Oxford hours.
And as I walk around, certain places stick with me; a cathedral towers over a dark blue foreign town, glowing like ivory in the sunset; now I’m in a French garden, filled with lilacs and bees, soaking up the sunshine, while the Mediterranean relaxes and flows just outside its walls; now I’m in a small college library, surrounded by busts and the green light reflecting off the Oxford lawns—and again I hear the bells, reminding me of the familiar Oxford hours.
The Poplar
The Poplar
There is a great tree in Sussex, whose cloud of thin foliage floats high in the summer air. The thrush sings in it, and blackbirds, who fill the late, decorative sunshine with a shimmer of golden sound. There the nightingale finds her green cloister; and on those branches sometimes, like a great fruit, hangs the lemon-colored Moon. In the glare of August, when all the world is faint with heat, there is always a breeze in those cool recesses, always a noise, like the noise of water, among its lightly-hung leaves.
There’s a huge tree in Sussex, with a light canopy that drifts high in the summer air. The thrush sings in it, and the blackbirds fill the late, beautiful sunshine with a golden melody. There, the nightingale finds her green sanctuary; and sometimes, hanging on those branches like a big fruit, is the lemon-colored moon. In the heat of August, when the world feels overwhelmed by heat, there’s always a breeze in those cool spots, always a sound, like water, among its lightly swaying leaves.
BEYOND LIFE
By James Branch Cabell
To my taste, Beyond Life, an all-night soliloquy put into the mouth of the author's alter ego Charteris, is the most satisfying of Mr. Cabell's books. Its point of view is deftly sharpened, its manner is urbane and charming, without posture or allegorical pseudo-romantics. From this book I have taken the two closing sections, which form a beautiful and significant whole.
To me, Beyond Life, a lengthy monologue delivered by the author’s alter ego Charteris, is the most fulfilling of Mr. Cabell's works. Its perspective is skillfully refined, and its style is sophisticated and appealing, free from pretentiousness or fake romanticism. From this book, I’ve selected the last two sections, which create a beautiful and meaningful whole.
James Branch Cabell, born in Richmond, Virginia, in 1879, graduated from William and Mary College in 1898. He had some newspaper experience in Richmond and on the New York Herald, and began publishing in 1904. Not until 1915, until Mr. McBride, the New York publisher, and his untiring literary assistant, Mr. Guy Holt (to whom much of Cabell's appreciation is due), began their work, did critics begin to take him at all seriously. Since that time Mr. Cabell's reputation has been enormously enhanced by the idiotic suppression of his novel Jurgen. The Cabell cult has been almost too active in zeal, but there can be no doubt of his very real and refreshing imaginative talent.
James Branch Cabell, born in Richmond, Virginia, in 1879, graduated from William and Mary College in 1898. He had some newspaper experience in Richmond and at the New York Herald, and started publishing in 1904. It wasn't until 1915, when Mr. McBride, the New York publisher, and his dedicated literary assistant, Mr. Guy Holt (to whom much of Cabell's recognition is owed), began their efforts, that critics started to take him seriously. Since then, Cabell's reputation has been significantly boosted by the controversial suppression of his novel Jurgen. The Cabell fanbase has been almost overly enthusiastic, but there's no denying his genuine and refreshing imaginative talent.
I ASK of literature precisely those things of which I feel the lack in my own life. I appeal for charity, and implore that literature afford me what I cannot come by in myself....
I ASK of literature exactly what I feel is missing in my own life. I seek kindness and desperately ask that literature gives me what I can't find within myself....
For I want distinction for that existence which ought to be peculiarly mine, among my innumerable fellows who swarm about earth like ants. Yet which one of us is noticeably, or can be appreciably different, in this throng of human ephemeræ and all their millions and inestimable millions of millions of predecessors and oncoming progeny? And even though one mote may transiently appear exceptional, the distinction of those who in their heydays are "great" personages—much as the Emperor of Lilliput overtopped his subjects by the breadth of Captain Gulliver's nail—must suffer loss with time, and must dwindle continuously, until at most the man's recorded name remains here and there in sundry pedants' libraries. There were how many dynasties of Pharaohs, each one of whom was absolute lord of the known world, and is to-day forgotten? Among the countless popes who one by one were adored as the regent of Heaven upon earth, how many persons can to-day distinguish? and does not time breed emperors and czars and presidents as plentiful as blackberries, and as little thought of when their season is out? For there is no perpetuity in human endeavor: we strut upon a quicksand: and all that any man may do for good or ill is presently forgotten, because it does not matter. I wail to a familiar tune, of course, in this lament for the evanescence of human grandeur and the perishable renown of kings. And indeed to the statement that imperial Cæsar is turned to clay and Mizraim now cures wounds, and that in short Queen Anne is dead, we may agree lightly enough; for it is, after all, a matter of no personal concern: but how hard it is to concede that the banker and the rector and the traffic-officer, to whom we more immediately defer, and we ourselves, and the little gold heads of our children, may be of no importance, either!... In art it may so happen that the thing which a man makes endures to be misunderstood and gabbled over: yet it is not the man himself. We retain the Iliad, but oblivion has swallowed Homer so deep that many question if he ever existed at all.... So we pass as a cloud of gnats, where I want to live and be thought of, if only by myself, as a distinguishable entity. And such distinction is impossible in the long progress of suns, whereby in thought to separate the personality of any one man from all others that have lived, becomes a task to stagger Omniscience....
For I want to stand out in a way that is uniquely mine, among the countless people who buzz around the earth like ants. But which one of us is truly different or can be significantly recognized in this crowd of fleeting humans and all their millions and countless millions of ancestors and future generations? And even if one tiny being seems exceptional for a moment, the distinction of those who, in their prime, are considered "great"—much like the Emperor of Lilliput towered over his subjects by the width of Captain Gulliver’s nail—will fade over time, and will continue to diminish, until only the name of the individual remains scattered here and there in various scholars' libraries. How many dynasties of Pharaohs were there, each one of whom ruled over the known world, but are now forgotten? Among the countless popes who were once revered as the representatives of Heaven on Earth, how many can we distinguish today? Doesn't time produce emperors, czars, and presidents as abundantly as blackberries, and are they not thought of just as little once their time is up? There is no permanence in human achievement: we strut upon quicksand, and everything any man does, for better or worse, is soon forgotten because it doesn't really matter. I sing this familiar song in lament for the fleeting nature of human greatness and the temporary fame of kings. Indeed, it's easy to agree that the imperial Caesar has turned to dust and that Mizraim now heals wounds, and that simply Queen Anne is dead; after all, it doesn’t concern us personally. But how hard it is to admit that the banker, the rector, the traffic officer, those we pay more immediate respect to, and even ourselves, and the little hopes of our children, might also be of little importance! In art, it may happen that what a person creates is misunderstood and discussed for ages, yet it’s not the person himself that endures. We still have the Iliad, but oblivion has consumed Homer so completely that many doubt he ever existed at all. So we pass like a swarm of gnats, where I want to live and be remembered, if only by myself, as a distinct being. But that distinction is impossible over the long course of time, where even to identify one person's individuality from all those who have lived becomes a daunting task even for an omniscient being.
I want my life, the only life of which I am assured, to have symmetry or, in default of that, at least to acquire some clarity. Surely it is not asking very much to wish that my personal conduct be intelligible to me! Yet it is forbidden to know for what purpose this universe was intended, to what end it was set a-going, or why I am here, or even what I had preferably do while here. It vaguely seems to me that I am expected to perform an allotted task, but as to what it is I have no notion.... And indeed, what have I done hitherto, in the years behind me? There are some books to show as increment, as something which was not anywhere before I made it, and which even in bulk will replace my buried body, so that my life will be to mankind no loss materially. But the course of my life, when I look back, is as orderless as a trickle of water that is diverted and guided by every pebble and crevice and grass-root it encounters. I seem to have done nothing with pre-meditation, but rather, to have had things done to me. And for all the rest of my life, as I know now, I shall have to shave every morning in order to be ready for no more than this!... I have attempted to make the best of my material circumstances always; nor do I see to-day how any widely varying course could have been wiser or even feasible: but material things have nothing to do with that life which moves in me. Why, then, should they direct and heighten and provoke and curb every action of life? It is against the tyranny of matter I would rebel—against life's absolute need of food, and books, and fire, and clothing, and flesh, to touch and to inhabit, lest life perish.... No, all that which I do here or refrain from doing lacks clarity, nor can I detect any symmetry anywhere, such as living would assuredly display, I think, if my progress were directed by any particular motive.... It is all a muddling through, somehow, without any recognizable goal in view, and there is no explanation of the scuffle tendered or anywhere procurable. It merely seems that to go on living has become with me a habit....
I want my life, the only one I'm sure of, to have some balance or, at the very least, to make some sense. Is it too much to ask for my actions to make sense to me? Yet, I’m forbidden from knowing why this universe exists, what its purpose is, or why I’m here, or even what I should be doing while I’m here. I feel like I'm supposed to complete a specific task, but I have no idea what it is... And honestly, what have I done up to now in the years behind me? I have a few books to show for my efforts, something that wasn’t there before I created it, which might even outlast me, meaning my life won’t be a total loss to humanity. But when I reflect on my life, it seems as chaotic as a stream of water that gets diverted and shaped by every stone and root it comes across. It feels like I haven’t done much intentionally; instead, things have just happened to me. And for the rest of my life, as I see it now, I’ll just keep getting ready each morning for... this! I’ve always tried to make the best of my situation, and I can’t see any other path that would’ve been smarter or even possible. But material things have nothing to do with the deeper life within me. So, why should they control and shape every action I take? I want to rebel against the tyranny of material needs—against the absolute requirement for food, books, warmth, clothing, and tangible things, lest life fade away... No, everything I do or don’t do here feels unclear, and I can’t find any balance, such as living would definitely show if my path were guided by some clear motive... It’s just a muddle, going through life without a clear goal in sight, and there’s no explanation for the struggle offered or available anywhere. It seems like just continuing to live has become a habit for me...
And I want beauty in my life. I have seen beauty in a sunset and in the spring woods and in the eyes of divers women, but now these happy accidents of light and color no longer thrill me. And I want beauty in my life itself, rather than in such chances as befall it. It seems to me that many actions of my life were beautiful, very long ago, when I was young in an evanished world of friendly girls, who were all more lovely than any girl is nowadays. For women now are merely more or less good-looking, and as I know, their looks when at their best have been painstakingly enhanced and edited.... But I would like this life which moves and yearns in me, to be able itself to attain to comeliness, though but in transitory performance. The life of a butterfly, for example, is just a graceful gesture: and yet, in that its loveliness is complete and perfectly rounded in itself, I envy this bright flicker through existence. And the nearest I can come to my ideal is punctiliously to pay my bills, be polite to my wife, and contribute to deserving charities: and the program does not seem, somehow, quite adequate. There are my books, I know; and there is beauty "embalmed and treasured up" in many pages of my books, and in the books of other persons, too, which I may read at will: but this desire inborn in me is not to be satiated by making marks upon paper, nor by deciphering them.... In short, I am enamored of that flawless beauty of which all poets have perturbedly divined the existence somewhere, and which life as men know it simply does not afford nor anywhere foresee....
And I want beauty in my life. I've seen beauty in a sunset, in the spring woods, and in the eyes of different women, but now those happy moments of light and color no longer excite me. I want beauty in my life itself, not just in random occurrences. It seems to me that many things I did in my past were beautiful, long ago, when I was young in a vanished world of friendly girls who were all more lovely than any girl is today. Nowadays, women are just more or less attractive, and as I know, their appearances, at their best, have been carefully enhanced and edited. But I want this life that stirs and yearns within me to achieve its own beauty, even if just temporarily. The life of a butterfly, for instance, is just a graceful act: yet in its complete and perfect loveliness, I envy that bright flicker of existence. The closest I can get to my ideal is by dutifully paying my bills, being nice to my wife, and supporting worthy charities: but somehow that plan doesn’t feel quite enough. I do have my books, and there’s beauty "preserved and cherished" in many pages of my books, and in the books of others that I can read anytime. But this deep desire in me can’t be satisfied by just marking paper or interpreting those marks. In short, I'm captivated by that perfect beauty that poets have desperately sensed exists somewhere, which life as men know it simply doesn't provide or foresee.
And tenderness, too—but does that appear a mawkish thing to desiderate in life? Well, to my finding human beings do not like one another. Indeed, why should they, being rational creatures? All babies have a temporary lien on tenderness, of course: and therefrom children too receive a dwindling income, although on looking back, you will recollect that your childhood was upon the whole a lonesome and much put-upon period. But all grown persons ineffably distrust one another.... In courtship, I grant you, there is a passing aberration which often mimics tenderness, sometimes as the result of honest delusion, but more frequently as an ambuscade in the endless struggle between man and woman. Married people are not ever tender with each other, you will notice: if they are mutually civil it is much: and physical contacts apart, their relation is that of a very moderate intimacy. My own wife, at all events, I find an unfailing mystery, a Sphinx whose secrets I assume to be not worth knowing: and, as I am mildly thankful to narrate, she knows very little about me, and evinces as to my affairs no morbid interest. That is not to assert that if I were ill she would not nurse me through any imaginable contagion, nor that if she were drowning I would not plunge in after her, whatever my delinquencies at swimming: what I mean is that, pending such high crises, we tolerate each other amicably, and never think of doing more.... And from our blood-kin we grow apart inevitably. Their lives and their interests are no longer the same as ours, and when we meet it is with conscious reservations and much manufactured talk. Besides, they know things about us which we resent.... And with the rest of my fellows, I find that convention orders all our dealings, even with children, and we do and say what seems more or less expected. And I know that we distrust one another all the while, and instinctively conceal or misrepresent our actual thoughts and emotions when there is no very apparent need.... Personally, I do not like human beings because I am not aware, upon the whole, of any generally distributed qualities which entitle them as a race to admiration and affection. But toward people in books—such as Mrs. Millamant, and Helen of Troy, and Bella Wilfer, and Mélusine, and Beatrix Esmond—I may intelligently overflow with tenderness and caressing words, in part because they deserve it, and in part because I know they will not suspect me of being "queer" or of having ulterior motives....
And tenderness, too—but does that seem like a sentimental thing to want in life? Well, it seems to me that people don't really like each other. Honestly, why should they, being rational beings? All babies get a temporary claim on tenderness, of course; and from that, children also receive a diminishing share, although when you look back, you’ll remember that your childhood was mostly a lonely and challenging time. But all adults completely distrust one another... In dating, I’ll give you that there’s a fleeting phase that often pretends to be tenderness, sometimes due to genuine delusion, but more often as a trap in the endless battle between men and women. You’ll notice that married people aren’t ever really tender with each other; if they’re civil, that’s already a lot. Aside from physical contact, their relationship is one of just a modest intimacy. As for my own wife, I find her a constant mystery, a Sphinx whose secrets I assume aren’t worth knowing; and, I’m somewhat grateful to say, she knows very little about me and shows no unhealthy curiosity about my life. That doesn’t mean that if I were sick she wouldn’t care for me through any possible contagion, or that if she were drowning I wouldn’t jump in after her, regardless of my swimming skills: what I mean is that, between such extreme situations, we get along amicably and never consider doing more... And with our blood relatives, we inevitably drift apart. Their lives and interests aren’t the same as ours anymore, and when we meet, it’s with conscious reservations and a lot of forced conversation. Plus, they know things about us that we don’t like... And with everyone else, I find that social norms dictate all our interactions, even with children, and we do and say what seems somewhat expected. And I know we distrust one another constantly, hiding or distorting our true thoughts and feelings when there’s no clear reason to do so... Personally, I don’t like people because I don’t really see any widely shared traits that merit admiration or affection for them as a group. But for characters in books—like Mrs. Millamant, Helen of Troy, Bella Wilfer, Mélusine, and Beatrix Esmond—I can genuinely express warmth and affectionate words, partly because they deserve it, and partly because I know they won’t think I’m “weird” or have hidden motives...
And I very often wish that I could know the truth about just any one circumstance connected with my life.... Is the phantasmagoria of sound and noise and color really passing or is it all an illusion here in my brain? How do you know that you are not dreaming me, for instance? In your conceded dreams, I am sure, you must invent and see and listen to persons who for the while seem quite as real to you as I do now. As I do, you observe, I say! and what thing is it to which I so glibly refer as I? If you will try to form a notion of yourself, of the sort of a something that you suspect to inhabit and partially to control your flesh and blood body, you will encounter a walking bundle of superfluities: and when you mentally have put aside the extraneous things—your garments and your members and your body, and your acquired habits and your appetites and your inherited traits and your prejudices, and all other appurtenances which considered separately you recognize to be no integral part of you,—there seems to remain in those pearl-colored brain-cells, wherein is your ultimate lair, very little save a faculty for receiving sensations, of which you know the larger portion to be illusory. And surely, to be just a very gullible consciousness provisionally existing among inexplicable mysteries, is not an enviable plight. And yet this life—to which I cling tenaciously—comes to no more. Meanwhile I hear men talk about "the truth"; and they even wager handsome sums upon their knowledge of it: but I align myself with "jesting Pilate," and echo the forlorn query that recorded time has left unanswered....
And I often wish I could know the truth about any situation in my life. Is the chaotic mix of sounds, noises, and colors really happening, or is it just an illusion in my mind? How can you be sure you’re not dreaming about me, for instance? In your own dreams, I’m sure you create and experience people who seem just as real to you as I do right now. As I do, you see, I say! And what is this thing I casually refer to as "I"? If you try to imagine yourself and what you think controls your body, you’ll encounter a walking collection of excess. When you mentally set aside everything extra—your clothes, your limbs, your body, your habits, your desires, your inherited traits, your biases, and all other things that individually don’t define you—what’s left in those gray brain cells, your ultimate home, is very little but a capacity for experiencing sensations, most of which you know aren’t real. And truly, being just a very impressionable consciousness temporarily living among unexplainable mysteries isn’t a desirable situation. Yet this life— which I hold on to tightly— amounts to nothing more. Meanwhile, I hear people talk about "the truth," and they even bet large sums on their understanding of it: but I find myself like "jesting Pilate," echoing the hopeless question that time has left unanswered...
Then, last of all, I desiderate urbanity. I believe this is the rarest quality in the world. Indeed, it probably does not exist anywhere. A really urbane person—a mortal open-minded and affable to conviction of his own shortcomings and errors, and unguided in anything by irrational blind prejudices—could not but in a world of men and women be regarded as a monster. We are all of us, as if by instinct, intolerant of that which is unfamiliar: we resent its impudence: and very much the same principle which prompts small boys to jeer at a straw-hat out of season induces their elders to send missionaries to the heathen. The history of the progress of the human race is but the picaresque romance of intolerance, a narrative of how—what is it Milton says?—"truth never came into the world but, like a bastard, to the ignominy of him that brought her forth, till time hath washed and salted the infant, declared her legitimate, and churched the father of his young Minerva." And I, who prattle to you, very candidly confess that I have no patience with other people's ideas unless they coincide with mine: for if the fellow be demonstrably wrong I am fretted by his stupidity, and if his notion seem more nearly right than mine I am infuriated.... Yet I wish I could acquire urbanity, very much as I would like to have wings. For in default of it, I cannot even manage to be civil to that piteous thing called human nature, or to view its parasites, whether they be politicians or clergymen or popular authors, with one-half the commiseration which the shifts they are put to, quite certainly, would rouse in the urbane....
Then, above all, I desire sophistication. I believe this is the rarest quality in the world. In fact, it probably doesn't exist anywhere. A truly sophisticated person—someone open-minded and easygoing enough to recognize their own flaws and mistakes, and not guided by irrational blind prejudices—would likely be seen as a freak in a world full of men and women. We all, almost instinctively, resist what’s unfamiliar; we resent its boldness, and much like how young boys mock someone wearing a straw hat out of season, adults often feel compelled to send missionaries to the less fortunate. The history of human progress is just the wild tale of intolerance, a story of how—what does Milton say?—"truth never entered the world except, like an illegitimate child, to the disgrace of the one who bore her, until time has washed and purified the infant, declared her legitimate, and blessed the father of his young Minerva." And I, who talk to you now, honestly admit that I have no patience for other people's ideas unless they align with mine: if the person is clearly wrong, I get annoyed by their ignorance, and if their idea seems more accurate than mine, I become furious... Yet I wish I could gain sophistication, much like I’d like to have wings. Because without it, I can’t even be polite to that sad thing called human nature, or look at its hangers-on, whether they are politicians, clergymen, or popular authors, with even half the sympathy that their struggles would surely evoke in someone sophisticated...
So I in point of fact desire of literature, just as you guessed, precisely those things of which I most poignantly and most constantly feel the lack in my own life. And it is that which romance affords her postulants. The philtres of romance are brewed to free us from this unsatisfying life that is calendared by fiscal years, and to contrive a less disastrous elusion of our own personalities than many seek dispersedly in drink and drugs and lust and fanaticism, and sometimes in death. For, beset by his own rationality, the normal man is goaded to evade the strictures of his normal life, upon the incontestable ground that it is a stupid and unlovely routine; and to escape likewise from his own personality, which bores him quite as much as it does his associates. So he hurtles into these very various roads from reality, precisely as a goaded sheep flees without notice of what lies ahead....
So I actually crave literature, just like you guessed, exactly those things that I feel most intensely and constantly lack in my own life. And that's what romance offers its seekers. The magic of romance is designed to free us from this unfulfilling life marked by financial years and to create a less damaging escape from our own identities than many chase aimlessly in alcohol, drugs, lust, fanaticism, and sometimes even death. Overwhelmed by his own rationality, the average person is pushed to avoid the constraints of his normal life, on the undeniable grounds that it’s a dull and unattractive routine; and to also escape from his own identity, which bores him just as much as it does those around him. So he rushes down these various paths away from reality, just like a scared sheep flees without knowing what lies ahead...
And romance tricks him, but not to his harm. For, be it remembered that man alone of animals plays the ape to his dreams. Romance it is undoubtedly who whispers to every man that life is not a blind and aimless business, not all a hopeless waste and confusion; and that his existence is a pageant (appreciatively observed by divine spectators), and that he is strong and excellent and wise: and to romance he listens, willing and thrice willing to be cheated by the honeyed fiction. The things of which romance assures him are very far from true: yet it is solely by believing himself a creature but little lower than the cherubim that man has by interminable small degrees become, upon the whole, distinctly superior to the chimpanzee: so that, however extravagant may seem these flattering whispers to-day, they were immeasurably more remote from veracity when men first began to listen to their sugared susurrus, and steadily the discrepancy lessens. To-day these things seem quite as preposterous to calm consideration as did flying yesterday: and so, to the Gradgrindians, romance appears to discourse foolishly, and incurs the common fate of prophets: for it is about to-morrow and about the day after to-morrow, that romance is talking, by means of parables. And all the while man plays the ape to fairer and yet fairer dreams, and practice strengthens him at mimickry....
And romance tricks him, but not to his detriment. For, let's remember that man, unlike any other animal, mimics his dreams. It's definitely romance that whispers to every man that life isn't just a random, pointless endeavor; it's not all a futile mess. Instead, his existence is like a show (appreciatively observed by divine spectators), and he's strong, remarkable, and wise: and he listens to romance, willingly and eagerly accepting the sweet deception. The things romance tells him are far from the truth: yet it's only by believing he's a being just a bit lower than angels that man has gradually become, overall, clearly superior to the chimpanzee. So, no matter how extravagant these flattering whispers may sound today, they were much further from reality when humans first started tuning into their sugary lullabies, and the gap is steadily closing. Today, these ideas sound just as ridiculous to rational thought as flying did yesterday: and so, to the Gradgrindians, romance seems to be talking nonsense and suffers the usual fate of prophets, because it speaks of tomorrow and the days after, using parables. And all the while, man mimics ever more beautiful dreams, and practice makes him better at imitation....
To what does the whole business tend?—why, how in heaven's name should I know? We can but be content to note that all goes forward, toward something.... It may be that we are nocturnal creatures perturbed by rumors of a dawn which comes inevitably, as prologue to a day wherein we and our children have no part whatever. It may be that when our arboreal propositus descended from his palm-tree and began to walk upright about the earth, his progeny were forthwith committed to a journey in which to-day is only a way-station. Yet I prefer to take it that we are components of an unfinished world, and that we are but as seething atoms which ferment toward its making, if merely because man as he now exists can hardly be the finished product of any Creator whom one could very heartily revere. We are being made into something quite unpredictable, I imagine: and through the purging and the smelting, we are sustained by an instinctive knowledge that we are being made into something better. For this we know, quite incommunicably, and yet as surely as we know that we will to have it thus.
What’s the whole point of this?—I really have no idea. We can only accept that everything moves forward, toward something... Maybe we’re like night creatures bothered by the whispers of a dawn that’s bound to happen, leading to a day where we and our children have no role at all. Perhaps when our tree-dwelling ancestor came down from his palm tree and started walking on the ground, his descendants were instantly set on a journey where today is just a stop along the way. Still, I’d rather believe we’re parts of an unfinished world, like restless atoms working toward its creation, if only because the way humans are now doesn’t seem like the final outcome of any Creator worth admiring. I think we’re being shaped into something completely unpredictable: through the refining and the forging, we’re fueled by an instinctive understanding that we’re being transformed into something better. This we know, though it’s hard to express, and yet just as surely as we know we want it to be this way.
THE FISH REPORTER
By Robert Cortes Holliday
This informal commentary on the picturesque humors of trade journalism is typical of Mr. Holliday's great skill in capturing the actual vibration of urban life. He has something of George Gissing's taste for the actuality of city scenes and characters, with rather more pungent idiosyncrasy in his manner of self-expression. Careful observers of the art of writing will see how much shrewd skill there is in the apparently unstudied manner. One of Mr. Holliday's favorite discussions on the art of writing is a phrase of Booth Tarkington's—"How to get the ink out of it." In other words, how to strip away mere literary and conscious adornment, and to get down to a translucent portraiture of life itself in its actual contour and profile.
This casual commentary on the vibrant quirks of trade journalism reflects Mr. Holliday's exceptional talent for capturing the true essence of urban life. He shares a bit of George Gissing's appreciation for the reality of city scenes and characters, but with a more distinctive and sharp style in his self-expression. Those who closely study the craft of writing will notice the subtle skill behind his seemingly effortless approach. One of Mr. Holliday's favorite discussions about writing is based on a phrase from Booth Tarkington—"How to get the ink out of it." In other words, it’s about removing unnecessary literary embellishments and revealing a clear depiction of life in its true form and essence.
We are told that Mr. Holliday, in his native Indianapolis (where he was born in 1880), was a champion bicycle rider at the age of sixteen. That triumph, however, was not permanently satisfying, for he came to New York in 1899 to study art; lived for a while, precariously, as an illustrator; worked for several years as a bookseller in Charles Scribner's retail store, and passed through all sorts of curious jobs on Grub Street, among others book reviewer on the Tribune and Times. He was editor of The Bookman after that magazine was taken over by the George H. Doran Company, and retired to the genteel dignity of "contributing editor" in 1920, to obtain leisure for more writing of his own.
We’re told that Mr. Holliday, born in Indianapolis in 1880, was a champion bicycle rider at sixteen. However, that achievement didn’t bring lasting satisfaction, so he moved to New York in 1899 to study art. He lived for a while in a precarious situation as an illustrator, worked for several years as a bookseller at Charles Scribner's retail store, and took on all sorts of odd jobs on Grub Street, including book reviewer for the Tribune and Times. He later became the editor of The Bookman after the magazine was acquired by the George H. Doran Company, and in 1920, he stepped back to the respectable role of "contributing editor" so he could have more time to write his own work.
Mr. Holliday has the genuine gift of the personal essay, mellow, fluent, and pleasantly eccentric. His Walking-Stick Papers, Broome Street Straws, Turns about Town and Peeps at People have that charming rambling humor that descends to him from his masters in this art, Hazlitt and Thackeray. When Mr. Holliday was racking his wits for a title for Men and Books and Cities (that odd Borrovian chronicle of his mind, body and digestion on tour across the continent) I suggested The Odyssey of an Oddity. He deprecated this; but I still think it would have been a good title, because strictly true.
Mr. Holliday has a true talent for personal essays—warm, smooth, and refreshingly quirky. His Walking-Stick Papers, Broome Street Straws, Turns about Town, and Peeps at People carry that delightful, meandering humor he inherits from his mentors in this genre, Hazlitt and Thackeray. When Mr. Holliday was brainstorming for a title for Men and Books and Cities (that strange Borrovian account of his experiences, feelings, and digestion while traveling across the continent), I suggested The Odyssey of an Oddity. He didn’t like it, but I still believe it would have been a fitting title, as it’s completely accurate.
MEN of genius, blown by the winds of chance, have been, now and then, mariners, bar-keeps, schoolmasters, soldiers, politicians, clergymen, and what not. And from these pursuits have they sucked the essence of yarns and in the setting of these activities found a flavor to stir and to charm hearts untold. Now, it is a thousand pities that no man of genius has ever been a fish reporter. Thus has the world lost great literary treasure, as it is highly probable that there is not under the sun any prospect so filled with the scents and colors of story as that presented by the commerce in fish.
MEN of genius, carried by the winds of chance, have occasionally been mariners, bartenders, teachers, soldiers, politicians, clergy, and more. From these jobs, they've drawn the essence of stories and found a unique flavor in these activities that resonates and captivates countless hearts. It’s a great shame that no genius has ever taken on the role of a fish reporter. As a result, the world has missed out on a significant literary treasure, since there’s likely no other experience brimming with the scents and colors of stories quite like the trade of fish.
Take whale oil. Take the funny old buildings on Front Street, out of paintings, I declare, by Howard Pyle, where the large merchants in whale oil are. Take salt fish. Do you know the oldest salt-fish house in America, down by Coenties Slip? Ah! you should. The ghost of old Long John Silver, I suspect, smokes an occasional pipe in that old place. And many are the times I've seen the slim shade of young Jim Hawkins come running out. Take Labrador cod for export to the Mediterranean lands or to Porto Rico via New York. Take herrings brought to this port from Iceland, from Holland, and from Scotland; mackerel from Ireland, from the Magdalen Islands, and from Cape Breton; crabmeat from Japan; fishballs from Scandinavia; sardines from Norway and from France; caviar from Russia; shrimp which comes from Florida, Mississippi, and Georgia, or salmon from Alaska, and Puget Sound, and the Columbia River.
Take whale oil. Take the quirky old buildings on Front Street, straight out of paintings, I swear, by Howard Pyle, where the big merchants in whale oil are. Take salt fish. Do you know the oldest salt-fish house in America, down by Coenties Slip? Ah! you should. I suspect the ghost of old Long John Silver lounges around with an occasional pipe in that old place. And many times I’ve seen the slim shade of young Jim Hawkins come running out. Take Labrador cod for export to the Mediterranean or to Puerto Rico via New York. Take herring brought to this port from Iceland, Holland, and Scotland; mackerel from Ireland, the Magdalen Islands, and Cape Breton; crabmeat from Japan; fishballs from Scandinavia; sardines from Norway and France; caviar from Russia; shrimp from Florida, Mississippi, and Georgia, or salmon from Alaska, Puget Sound, and the Columbia River.
Take the obituaries of fishermen. "In his prime, it is said, there was not a better skipper in the Gloucester fishing fleet." Take disasters to schooners, smacks, and trawlers. "The crew were landed, but lost all their belongings." New vessels, sales, etc. "The sealing schooner Tillie B., whose career in the South Seas is well known, is reported to have been sold to a moving-picture firm." Sponges from the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico. "To most people, familiar only with the sponges of the shops, the animal as it comes from the sea would be rather unrecognizable." Why, take anything you please! It is such stuff as stories are. And as you eat your fish from the store how little do you reck of the glamor of what you are doing!
Take the obituaries of fishermen. "In his prime, it's said, there wasn't a better skipper in the Gloucester fishing fleet." Look at disasters involving schooners, smacks, and trawlers. "The crew were rescued, but lost all their belongings." New vessels, sales, etc. "The sealing schooner Tillie B., famous for its time in the South Seas, is reported to have been sold to a movie studio." Sponges from the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico. "To most people, who only know the sponges from stores, the animal as it comes from the sea would be pretty unrecognizable." Seriously, take anything you want! This is what stories are made of. And as you enjoy your fish from the store, how little do you appreciate the allure of what you're doing!
However, as it seems to me unlikely that a man of genius will be a fish reporter shortly I will myself do the best I can to paint the tapestry of the scenes of his calling. The advertisement in the newspaper read: "Wanted—Reporter for weekly trade paper." Many called, but I was chosen. Though, doubtless, no man living knew less about fish than I.
However, since it seems unlikely that a genius will become a fish reporter anytime soon, I’ll do my best to capture the essence of his work. The ad in the newspaper said: "Wanted—Reporter for a weekly trade paper." Many people applied, but I was selected, even though it’s true that no one knew less about fish than I did.
The news stands are each like a fair, so laden are they with magazines in bright colors. It would seem almost as if there were a different magazine for every few hundred and seven-tenth person, as the statistics put these matters. And yet, it seems, there is a vast, a very vast, periodical literature of which we, that is, magazine readers in general, know nothing whatever. There is, for one, that fine, old, standard publication, Barrel and Box, devoted to the subjects and the interests of the coopering industry; there is too, The Dried Fruit Packer and Western Canner, as alert a magazine as one could wish—in its kind; and from the home of classic American literature comes The New England Tradesman and Grocer. And so on. At the place alone where we went to press twenty-seven trade journals were printed every week, from one for butchers to one for bankers.
The newsstands are like fairs, overflowing with brightly colored magazines. It seems like there’s almost a different magazine for every few hundred and seventy people, according to the statistics. Yet, there’s a huge, really huge, world of periodical literature that we, meaning magazine readers in general, know nothing about. For instance, there's that classic, reputable publication, Barrel and Box, focused on the coopering industry; then there's The Dried Fruit Packer and Western Canner, an enthusiastic magazine in its field; and from the birthplace of classic American literature comes The New England Tradesman and Grocer. And it goes on. At the place where we printed alone, twenty-seven trade journals were produced every week, from one for butchers to one for bankers.
The Fish Industries Gazette—Ah, yes! For some reason not clear (though it is an engaging thing, I think) the word "gazette" is the great word among the titles of trade journals. There are The Jewellers' Gazette and The Women's Wear Gazette and The Poulterers' Gazette (of London), and The Maritime Gazette (of Halifax), and other gazettes quite without number. This word "gazette" makes its appeal, too, curiously enough, to those who christen country papers; and trade journals have much of the intimate charm of country papers. The "trade" in each case is a kind of neighborly community, separated in its parts by space, but joined in unity of sympathy. "Personals" are a vital feature of trade papers. "Walter Conner, who for some time has conducted a bakery and fish market at Hudson, N. Y., has removed to Fort Edward, leaving his brother Ed in charge at the Hudson place of business."
The Fish Industries Gazette—Ah, yes! For some unclear reason (though I find it intriguing), the word "gazette" is a popular choice among the titles of trade journals. There are The Jewellers' Gazette, The Women's Wear Gazette, and The Poulterers' Gazette (of London), as well as The Maritime Gazette (of Halifax), along with countless other gazettes. This word "gazette" also seems to resonate with those who name local papers; trade journals share many of the cozy qualities of local papers. The "trade" in each case resembles a close-knit community, divided by distance but united in understanding. "Personals" are an essential part of trade papers. "Walter Conner, who has been running a bakery and fish market in Hudson, NY, has moved to Fort Edward, leaving his brother Ed in charge at the Hudson location."
The Fish Industries Gazette, as I say, was one of several in its field, in friendly rivalry with The Oyster Trade and Fisherman and The Pacific Fisheries. It comprised two departments: the fresh fish and oyster department, and myself. I was, as an editorial announcement said at the beginning of my tenure of office, a "reorganization of our salt, smoked, and pickled fish department." The delectable, mellow spirit of the country paper, so removed from the crash and whirr of metropolitan journalism, rested in this, too, that upon the Gazette I did practically everything on the paper except the linotyping. Reporter, editorial writer, exchange editor, make-up man, proof-reader, correspondent, advertisement solicitor, was I.
The Fish Industries Gazette, as I mentioned, was one of several in its field, in friendly competition with The Oyster Trade and Fisherman and The Pacific Fisheries. It had two sections: the fresh fish and oyster section, and me. I was, as an editorial announcement stated at the start of my time in this role, a "reorganization of our salt, smoked, and pickled fish department." The charming, easygoing vibe of the local paper, so different from the hustle and bustle of big city journalism, was also reflected in the fact that on the Gazette I did nearly everything for the paper except the linotyping. I was the reporter, editorial writer, exchange editor, layout artist, proofreader, correspondent, and advertisement solicitor.
As exchange editor, did I read all the papers in the English language in eager search of fish news. And while you are about the matter, just find me a finer bit of literary style evoking the romance of the vast wastes of the moving sea, in Stevenson, Defoe, anywhere you please, than such a news item as this: "Capt. Ezra Pound, of the bark Elnora, of Salem, Mass., spoke a lonely vessel in latitude this and longitude that, September 8. She proved to be the whaler Wanderer, and her captain said that she had been nine months at sea, that all on board were well, and that he had stocked so many barrels of whale oil."
As the exchange editor, I read all the papers in English, eagerly searching for fishing news. And while you're at it, find me a better piece of writing that captures the romance of the vast, moving sea, whether it’s in Stevenson, Defoe, or anywhere you want, than this news item: "Capt. Ezra Pound of the bark Elnora, from Salem, Mass., spoke to a lonely vessel at this latitude and longitude on September 8. It turned out to be the whaler Wanderer, and her captain said he had been at sea for nine months, that everyone on board was well, and that he had loaded a lot of barrels of whale oil."
As exchange editor was it my business to peruse reports from Eastport, Maine, to the effect that one of the worst storms in recent years had destroyed large numbers of the sardine weirs there. To seek fish recipes, of such savory sound as those for "broiled redsnapper," "shrimps bordelaise," and "baked fish croquettes." To follow fishing conditions in the North Sea occasioned by the Great War. To hunt down jokes of piscatory humor. "The man who drinks like a fish does not take kindly to water.—Exchange." To find other "fillers" in the consular reports and elsewhere: "Fish culture in India," "1800 Miles in a Dory," "Chinese Carp for the Philippines," "Americans as Fish Eaters." And, to use a favorite term of trade papers, "etc., etc." Then to "paste up" the winnowed fruits of this beguiling research.
As the exchange editor, it was my job to review reports from Eastport, Maine, stating that one of the worst storms in recent years had destroyed a lot of the sardine traps there. To look for fish recipes, as tempting as "broiled red snapper," "shrimp bordelaise," and "baked fish croquettes." To keep track of fishing conditions in the North Sea due to the Great War. To dig up jokes related to fishing humor. "The man who drinks like a fish doesn't take kindly to water.—Exchange." To find other "fillers" in the consular reports and elsewhere: "Fish culture in India," "1800 Miles in a Dory," "Chinese Carp for the Philippines," "Americans as Fish Eaters." And, to use a popular term from trade papers, "etc., etc." Then to "paste up" the selected results of this fascinating research.
As editorial writer, to discuss the report of the commission recently sent by congress to the Pribilof Islands, Alaska, to report on the condition of our national herd of fur seals; to discuss the official interpretation here of the Government ruling on what constitutes "boneless" codfish; to consider the campaign in Canada to promote there a more popular consumption of fish, and to brightly remark à propos of this that "a fish a day keeps the doctor away"; to review the current issue of The Journal of the Fisheries Society of Japan, containing leading articles on "Are Fishing Motor Boats Able to Encourage in Our Country" and "Fisherman the Late Mr. H. Yamaguchi Well Known"; to combat the prejudice against dogfish as food, a prejudice like that against eels, in some quarters eyed askance as "calling cousins with the great sea-serpent," as Juvenal says; to call attention to the doom of one of the most picturesque monuments in the story of fish, the passing of the pleasant and celebrated old Trafalgar Hotel at Greenwich, near London, scene of the famous Ministerial white-bait dinners of the days of Pitt; to make a jest on an exciting idea suggested by some medical man that some of the features of a Ritz-Carlton Hotel, that is, baths, be introduced into the fo'c's'les of Grand Banks fishing vessels; to keep an eye on the activities of our Bureau of Fisheries; to hymn a praise to the monumental new Fish Pier at Boston; to glance at conditions at the premier fish market of the world, Billingsgate; to herald the fish display at the Canadian National Exhibition at Toronto, and, indeed, etc., and again etc.
As an editorial writer, I’m here to discuss the report from the commission recently sent by Congress to the Pribilof Islands in Alaska to assess the status of our national herd of fur seals; to go over the official interpretation of the government ruling on what counts as "boneless" codfish; to consider the campaign in Canada aimed at increasing the popularity of fish consumption; to humorously note that "a fish a day keeps the doctor away"; to review the current issue of The Journal of the Fisheries Society of Japan, which includes leading articles on "Can Fishing Motor Boats Promote This in Our Country?" and "Fisherman the Late Mr. H. Yamaguchi, Well Known"; to challenge the bias against dogfish as a food source, a bias similar to that against eels, which some regard suspiciously as "relatives of the great sea serpent," as Juvenal puts it; to highlight the impending loss of one of the most iconic landmarks in fish history, the beloved old Trafalgar Hotel at Greenwich near London, renowned for its famous Ministerial white-bait dinners during the Pitt era; to joke about an intriguing suggestion from a medical professional that some features of a Ritz-Carlton Hotel, specifically baths, be added to the fo'c's'les of Grand Banks fishing vessels; to monitor the activities of our Bureau of Fisheries; to sing the praises of the impressive new Fish Pier in Boston; to take a look at conditions in the world’s leading fish market, Billingsgate; to promote the fish display at the Canadian National Exhibition in Toronto, and so on, and so forth.
As general editorial roustabout, to find each week a "leader," a translation, say, from In Allgemeine Fishcherei-Zeitung, or Economic Circular No. 10, "Mussels in the Tributaries of the Missouri," or the last biennial report of the Superintendent of Fisheries of Wisconsin, or a scientific paper on "The Porpoise in Captivity" reprinted by permission of Zoologica, of the New York Zoölogical Society. To find each week for reprint a poem appropriate in sentiment to the feeling of the paper. One of the "Salt Water Ballads" would do, or John Masefield singing of "the whale's way," or "Down to the white dipping sails"; or Rupert Brooke: "And in that heaven of all their wish, There shall be no more land, say fish"; or a "weather rhyme" about "mackerel skies," when "you're sure to get a fishing day"; or something from the New York Sun about "the lobster pots of Maine"; or Oliver Herford, in the Century, "To a Goldfish"; or, best of all, an old song of fishing ways of other days.
As a general editorial assistant, I need to find a "leader" each week, like a translation from In Allgemeine Fishcherei-Zeitung or Economic Circular No. 10, "Mussels in the Tributaries of the Missouri," or the latest biennial report from the Superintendent of Fisheries of Wisconsin, or a scientific paper on "The Porpoise in Captivity," reprinted with permission from Zoologica of the New York Zoölogical Society. I also need to find a poem each week that matches the sentiment of the paper. A "Salt Water Ballad" would work, or John Masefield's lines about "the whale's way," or "Down to the white dipping sails"; or Rupert Brooke's: "And in that heaven of all their wish, There shall be no more land, say fish"; or a "weather rhyme" about "mackerel skies," when "you're sure to get a fishing day"; or something from the New York Sun about "the lobster pots of Maine"; or Oliver Herford in the Century, "To a Goldfish"; or, best of all, an old song about fishing traditions from the past.
And to compile from the New York Journal of Commerce better poetry than any of this, tables, beautiful tables of "imports into New York": "Oct. 15.—From Bordeaux, 225 cs. cuttlefish bone; Copenhagen, 173 pkgs. fish; Liverpool, 969 bbls. herrings, 10 walrus hides, 2,000 bags salt; La Guayra, 6 cs. fish sounds; Belize, 9 bbls. sponges; Rotterdam, 7 pkgs. seaweed, 9,000 kegs herrings; Barcelona, 235 cs. sardines; Bocas Del Toro, 5 cs. turtle shells; Genoa, 3 boxes corals; Tampico, 2 pkgs. sponges; Halifax, 1 cs. seal skins, 35 bbls. cod liver oil, 215 cs. lobsters, 490 bbls. codfish; Akureyri, 4,150 bbls. salted herrings," and much more. Beautiful tables of "exports from New York." "To Australia" (cleared Sep. 1); "to Argentina";—Haiti, Jamaica, Guatemala, Scotland, Salvador, Santo Domingo, England, and to places many more. And many other gorgeous tables, too. "Fishing vessels at New York," for one, listing the "trips" brought into this port by the Stranger, the Sarah O'Neal, the Nourmahal, a farrago of charming sounds, and a valuable tale of facts.
And to compile from the New York Journal of Commerce better poetry than any of this, beautiful tables of "imports into New York": "Oct. 15.—From Bordeaux, 225 cases of cuttlefish bone; Copenhagen, 173 packages of fish; Liverpool, 969 barrels of herrings, 10 walrus hides, 2,000 bags of salt; La Guayra, 6 cases of fish sounds; Belize, 9 barrels of sponges; Rotterdam, 7 packages of seaweed, 9,000 kegs of herrings; Barcelona, 235 cases of sardines; Bocas Del Toro, 5 cases of turtle shells; Genoa, 3 boxes of corals; Tampico, 2 packages of sponges; Halifax, 1 case of seal skins, 35 barrels of cod liver oil, 215 cases of lobsters, 490 barrels of codfish; Akureyri, 4,150 barrels of salted herrings," and much more. Beautiful tables of "exports from New York." "To Australia" (cleared Sep. 1); "to Argentina";—Haiti, Jamaica, Guatemala, Scotland, El Salvador, Santo Domingo, England, and many more places. And many other gorgeous tables, too. "Fishing vessels at New York," for one, listing the "trips" brought into this port by the Stranger, the Sarah O'Neal, the Nourmahal, a jumble of charming sounds, and a valuable collection of facts.
As make-up man, of course, so to "dress" the paper that the "markets," Oporto, Trinidad, Porto Rico, Demerara, Havana, would be together; that "Nova Scotia Notes"—"Weather conditions for curing have been more favorable since October set in"—would follow "Halifax Fish Market"—"Last week's arrivals were: Oct. 13, schr. Hattie Loring, 960 quintals," etc.—that "Pacific Coast Notes"—"The tug Tatoosh will perform the service for the Seattle salmon packers of towing a vessel from Seattle to this port via the Panama Canal"—would follow "Canned Salmon"; that shellfish matter would be in one place; reports of saltfish where such should be; that the weekly tale of the canned fish trade politically embraced the canned fish advertising; and so on and so on.
As a makeup artist, of course, to "dress" the paper so that the "markets," Oporto, Trinidad, Puerto Rico, Demerara, Havana, would be grouped together; that "Nova Scotia Notes"—"Weather conditions for curing have been more favorable since October began"—would come after "Halifax Fish Market"—"Last week's arrivals were: Oct. 13, schr. Hattie Loring, 960 quintals," etc.—that "Pacific Coast Notes"—"The tug Tatoosh will provide service for the Seattle salmon packers by towing a vessel from Seattle to this port via the Panama Canal"—would follow "Canned Salmon"; that shellfish information would be in one spot; reports on saltfish would be where appropriate; that the weekly summary of the canned fish trade would also cover the canned fish advertising; and so on and so forth.
Finest of all, as reporter, to go where the fish reporter goes. There the sight-seeing cars never find their way; the hurried commuter has not his path, nor knows of these things at all; and there that racy character who, voicing a multitude, declares that he would rather be a lamp post on Broadway than Mayor of St. Louis, goes not for to see. Up lower Greenwich Street the fish reporter goes, along an eerie, dark, and narrow way, beneath a strange, thundering roof, the "L" overhead. He threads his way amid seemingly chaotic, architectural piles of boxes, of barrels, crates, casks, kegs, and bulging bags; roundabout many great fetlocked draught horses, frequently standing or plunging upon the sidewalk, and attached to many huge trucks and wagons; and much of the time in the street he is compelled to go, finding the side walks too congested with the traffic of commerce to admit of his passing there.
The best of all, as a reporter, is to go where the fish reporter goes. There, the sightseeing cars never find their way; the busy commuter has no route and knows nothing of this place at all; and that lively character who, speaking for many, claims he would rather be a lamp post on Broadway than the Mayor of St. Louis, doesn’t come to see it either. Up lower Greenwich Street, the fish reporter makes his way along a dark, eerie, narrow path beneath an unusual, booming ceiling of the "L" train overhead. He navigates through what seems like a chaotic maze of stacked boxes, barrels, crates, casks, kegs, and overflowing bags; weaving around many large, heavy draft horses that often stand or thrash on the sidewalk, attached to big trucks and wagons; and much of the time, he has to walk in the street since the sidewalks are too crowded with the hustle and bustle of commerce for him to get through.
You probably eat butter, and eggs, and cheese. Then you would delight in Greenwich Street. You could feast your highly creditable appetite for these excellent things for very nearly a solid mile upon the signs of "wholesale dealers and commission merchants" in them. The letter press, as you might say, of the fish reporter's walk is a noble pæan to the earth's glorious yield for the joyous sustenance of man. For these princely merchants' signs sing of opulent stores of olive oil, of sausages, beans, soups, extracts, and spices, sugar, Spanish, Bermuda, and Havana onions, "fine" apples, teas, coffee, rice, chocolates, dried fruits and raisins, and of loaves and of fishes, and of "fish products." Lo! dark and dirty and thundering Greenwich Street is to-day's translation of the Garden of Eden.
You probably eat butter, eggs, and cheese. If so, you would love Greenwich Street. You could satisfy your impressive appetite for these amazing foods for almost a whole mile just by looking at the signs for "wholesale dealers and commission merchants" selling them. The message of the fish reporter's walk is a grand tribute to the earth's glorious bounty for the joyful nourishment of people. These prominent merchants' signs boast about abundant supplies of olive oil, sausages, beans, soups, extracts, spices, sugar, Spanish onions, Bermuda onions, Havana onions, "fine" apples, teas, coffee, rice, chocolates, dried fruits and raisins, and all sorts of loaves and fishes, including "fish products." Indeed, dark, dirty, and bustling Greenwich Street is today's version of the Garden of Eden.
Here is a great house whose sole vocation is the importation of caviar for barter here. Caviar from over-seas now comes, when it comes at all, mainly by the way of Archangel, recently put on the map, for most of us, by the war. The fish reporter is told, however, if it be summer, that there cannot be much doing in the way of caviar until fall, "when the spoonbill start coming in." And on he goes to a great saltfish house, where many men in salt-stained garments are running about, their arms laden with large flat objects, of sharp and jagged edge, which resemble dried and crackling hides of some animal curiously like a huge fish; and numerous others of "the same" are trundling round wheelbarrow-like trucks likewise so laden. Where stacks of these hides stand on their tails against the walls, and goodness knows how many big boxes are, containing, as those open show, beautifully soft, thick, cream-colored slabs, which is fish. And where still other men, in overalls stained like a painter's palette, are knocking off the heads of casks and dipping out of brine still other kinds of fish for inspection.
Here is a great house whose only job is to import caviar for trade here. Caviar from overseas now comes, when it arrives at all, mainly through Archangel, which most of us became aware of because of the war. The fish reporter is informed, however, if it’s summer, that there isn’t much going on in terms of caviar until fall, "when the spoonbills start coming in." And on he goes to a large saltfish house, where many men in salt-stained clothes are bustling around, their arms loaded with large flat items, with sharp, jagged edges, that look like dried, crackling skins of some creature resembling a giant fish; and many others with similar loads are moving around on trucks like wheelbarrows. Stacks of these skins stand on their ends against the walls, and goodness knows how many big boxes are there, containing, as those that are opened show, beautifully soft, thick, cream-colored slabs, which are fish. And where even more men, in overalls marked like a painter's palette, are opening cask heads and dipping out other kinds of fish from brine for inspection.
Here it is said by the head of the house, by the stove (it is chill weather) in his office like a shipmaster's cabin: "Strong market on foreign mackerel. Mines hinder Norway catch. Advices from abroad report that German resources continue to purchase all available supplies from the Norwegian fishermen. No Irish of any account. Recent shipment sold on the deck at high prices. Fair demand from the Middle West."
Here, the head of the house says by the stove (it's chilly outside) in his office, which feels like a shipmaster's cabin: "There's a strong market for foreign mackerel. Mines are affecting the catch from Norway. Reports from abroad say that German buyers are snapping up all the available fish from Norwegian fishermen. No noteworthy deliveries from Ireland. A recent shipment sold off the deck at high prices. There's a good demand from the Midwest."
So, by stages, on up to turn into North Moore Street, looking down a narrow lane between two long bristling rows of wagons pointed out from the curbs, to the façades of the North River docks at the bottom, with the tops of the buff funnels of ocean liners, and Whistleranean silhouettes of derricks, rising beyond. Hereabout are more importers, exporters, and "producers" of fish, famous in their calling beyond the celebrities of popular publicity. And he that has official entrée may learn, by mounting dusky stairs, half-ladder and half-stair, and by passing through low-ceilinged chambers freighted with many barrels, to the sanctums of the fish lords, what's doing in the foreign herring way, and get the current market quotations, at present sky-high, and hear that the American shore mackerel catch is very fine stock.
So, by stages, as you turn onto North Moore Street, you look down a narrow lane between two long rows of wagons parked along the curbs, leading to the North River docks at the end, where you can see the tops of the buff funnels from ocean liners and the dark silhouettes of derricks rising beyond. In this area, there are more importers, exporters, and "producers" of fish, who are well-known in their field, overshadowing the celebrities of popular publicity. Those with official access can find out what’s happening in the foreign herring trade by climbing some dark stairs that feel half like a ladder and half like stairs, and walking through low-ceilinged rooms filled with barrels, to the inner offices of the fish traders, where they can get the latest market quotes, which are currently sky-high, and hear that the American mackerel catch is really good stock.
Then roundabout, with a step into the broad vista of homely Washington Street, and a turn through Franklin Street, where is the man decorated by the Imperial Japanese Government with a gold medal, if he should care to wear it, for having distinguished himself in the development of commerce in the marine products of Japan, back to Hudson Street. An authentic railroad is one of the spectacular features of Hudson Street.
Then we rounded the corner, stepping into the wide view of familiar Washington Street, and turned onto Franklin Street, where there's a man who was awarded a gold medal by the Imperial Japanese Government, if he chooses to wear it, for his excellence in developing Japan's marine commerce, back to Hudson Street. A real railroad is one of the standout features of Hudson Street.
Here down the middle of the way are endless trains, stopping, starting, crashing, laden to their ears with freight, doubtless all to eat. Tourists should come from very far to view Hudson Street. Here is a spectacle as fascinating, as awe-inspiring, as extraordinary as any in the world. From dawn until darkness falls, hour after hour, along Hudson Street slowly, steadily moves a mighty procession of great trucks. One would not suppose there were so many trucks on the face of the earth. It is a glorious sight, and any man whose soul is not dead should jump with joy to see it. And the thunder of them altogether as they bang over the stones is like the music of the spheres.
Here in the middle of the road, endless trains are stopping, starting, and crashing, loaded to the brim with freight, likely all for food. Tourists should travel from far and wide to see Hudson Street. It's a spectacle that's as fascinating, awe-inspiring, and extraordinary as anything in the world. From dawn until night falls, hour after hour, a massive lineup of big trucks moves slowly and steadily along Hudson Street. You wouldn't think there could be so many trucks anywhere on Earth. It's a magnificent sight, and anyone whose heart isn’t numb should feel a rush of joy just witnessing it. And the roar of all of them rolling over the cobblestones sounds like the music of the universe.
There is on Hudson Street a tall handsome building where the fish reporter goes, which should be enjoyed in this way: Up in the lift you go to the top, and then you walk down, smacking your lips. For all the doors in that building are brimming with poetry. And the tune of it goes like this: "Toasted Corn-Flake Co.," "Seaboard Rice," "Chili Products," "Red Bloom Grape Juice Sales Office," "Porto Rico and Singapore Pineapple Co.," "Sunnyland Foodstuffs," "Importers of Fruit Pulps, Pimentos," "Sole Agents U. S. A. Italian Salad Oil," "Raisin Growers," "Log Cabin Syrups," "Jobbers in Beans, Peas," "Chocolate and Cocoa Preparations," "Ohio Evaporated Milk Co.," "Bernese Alps and Holland Condensed Milk Co.," "Brazilian Nuts Co.," "Brokers Pacific Coast Salmon," "California Tuna Co.," and thus on and on.
There’s a tall, attractive building on Hudson Street where the fish reporter goes, and it’s best enjoyed like this: Take the elevator to the top, then walk down, savoring the experience. Each door in that building is overflowing with creativity. The list goes like this: "Toasted Corn-Flake Co.," "Seaboard Rice," "Chili Products," "Red Bloom Grape Juice Sales Office," "Porto Rico and Singapore Pineapple Co.," "Sunnyland Foodstuffs," "Importers of Fruit Pulps, Pimentos," "Sole Agents U.S.A. Italian Salad Oil," "Raisin Growers," "Log Cabin Syrups," "Jobbers in Beans, Peas," "Chocolate and Cocoa Preparations," "Ohio Evaporated Milk Co.," "Bernese Alps and Holland Condensed Milk Co.," "Brazilian Nuts Co.," "Brokers Pacific Coast Salmon," "California Tuna Co.," and so on and so forth.
The fish reporter crosses the street to see the head of the Sardine Trust, who has just thrown the market into excitement by a heavy cut in prices of last year's pack. Thence, pausing to refresh himself by the way at a sign "Agency for Reims Champagne and Moselle Wines—Bordeaux Clarets and Sauternes," over to Broadway to interview the most august persons of all, dealers in fertilizer, "fish scrap." These mighty gentlemen live, when at business, in palatial suites of offices constructed of marble and fine woods and laid with rich rugs. The reporter is relayed into the innermost sanctum by a succession of richly clothed attendants. And he learns, it may be, that fishing in Chesapeake Bay is so poor that some of the "fish factories" may decide to shut down. Acid phosphate, it is said, is ruling at $13 f.o.b. Baltimore.
The fish reporter crosses the street to meet the head of the Sardine Trust, who just sparked excitement in the market with a big price cut on last year's pack. After that, he stops to grab a drink at a place that says "Agency for Reims Champagne and Moselle Wines—Bordeaux Clarets and Sauternes," then heads over to Broadway to interview the most important people of all, fertilizer dealers, "fish scrap." These powerful gentlemen, when working, occupy luxurious office suites made of marble and fine wood, decorated with rich rugs. The reporter is escorted into the inner sanctum by a series of well-dressed attendants. He finds out that fishing in Chesapeake Bay is so bad that some of the "fish factories" might consider shutting down. It’s reported that acid phosphate is priced at $13 f.o.b. Baltimore.
And so the fish reporter enters upon the last lap of his rounds. Through, perhaps, the narrow, crooked lane of Pine Street he passes, to come out at length upon a scene set for a sea tale. Here would a lad, heir to vast estates in Virginia, be kidnapped and smuggled aboard to be sold a slave in Africa. This is Front Street. A white ship lies at the foot of it. Cranes rise at her side. Tugs, belching smoke, bob beyond. All about are ancient warehouses, redolent of the Thames, with steep roofs and sometimes stairs outside, and with tall shutters, a crescent-shaped hole in each. There is a dealer in weather-vanes. Other things dealt in hereabout are these: chronometers, "nautical instruments," wax gums, cordage and twine, marine paints, cotton wool and waste, turpentine, oils, greases, and rosin. Queer old taverns, public houses, are here, too. Why do not their windows rattle with a "Yo, ho, ho"?
And so the fish reporter enters the final stretch of his rounds. Through the narrow, winding lane of Pine Street he goes, eventually reaching a scene straight out of a sea story. Here, a boy, heir to vast estates in Virginia, could be kidnapped and smuggled aboard to be sold as a slave in Africa. This is Front Street. A white ship sits at the end of it. Cranes rise beside her. Tugs, billowing smoke, bob in the distance. All around are old warehouses, smelling of the Thames, with steep roofs and sometimes outside stairs, and with tall shutters, each with a crescent-shaped hole. There’s a vendor selling weather vanes. Other items traded here include chronometers, "nautical instruments," wax gums, ropes and twine, marine paints, cotton wool and waste, turpentine, oils, greases, and rosin. There are also quirky old taverns and pubs nearby. Why don't their windows shake with a "Yo, ho, ho"?
There is an old, old house whose business has been fish oil within the memory of men. And here is another. Next, through Water Street, one comes in search of the last word on salt fish. Now the air is filled with gorgeous smell of roasting coffee. Tea, coffee, sugar, rice, spices, bags and bagging here have their home. And there are haughty bonded warehouses filled with fine liquors. From his white cabin at the top of a venerable structure comes the dean of the saltfish business. "Export trade fair," he says; "good demand from South America."
There’s an old house that’s been involved in fish oil for as long as anyone can remember. And here’s another one. Next, walking down Water Street, you can find the latest on salt fish. The air is now filled with the amazing smell of roasting coffee. This is a place for tea, coffee, sugar, rice, and spices, with bags and more bags everywhere. There are also impressive bonded warehouses full of fine liquors. From his white cabin at the top of an old building, the leader of the salt fish business speaks up. “Export trade is doing well,” he says; “there’s strong demand from South America.”
SOME NONSENSE ABOUT A DOG
By Harry Esty Dounce
Harry Esty Dounce was born in Syracuse in 1889 and graduated from Hamilton College in 1910. His first job was as a cub reporter on the journal that newspapermen affectionately call "the old Sun"; the adjective is pronounced as though it were in italics. He was on the staff of the Syracuse Herald, 1912-14; spent a year in New Orleans writing short stories, and returned in 1916 to the magazine staff of the Sun. He was editor of the Sun's book review section, 1919-20; in 1920 he joined the staff of the New York Evening Post.
Harry Esty Dounce was born in Syracuse in 1889 and graduated from Hamilton College in 1910. His first job was as a cub reporter at the newspaper that journalists affectionately call "the old Sun"; the adjective is pronounced as if it were in italics. He was part of the Syracuse Herald staff from 1912-14, spent a year in New Orleans writing short stories, and returned in 1916 to the magazine staff of the Sun. He served as the editor of the Sun's book review section from 1919-20; in 1920, he joined the staff of the New York Evening Post.
"My hand will miss the suggested nose—" |
William Watson. |
BUT the dog that was written of must have been a big dog. Nibbie was just a comfortable lapful, once he had duly turned around and curled up with his nose in his tail.
BUT the dog that was mentioned must have been a large dog. Nibbie was just the perfect size for a lap dog, once he had turned around and curled up with his nose tucked into his tail.
This is for people who know about dogs, in particular little mongrels without pedigree or market value. Other people, no doubt, will find it disgustingly maudlin. I would have found it so before Nibbie came.
This is for people who understand dogs, especially little mutts without pedigree or market value. Other people will probably think it's overly sentimental. I would have thought so too before Nibbie came along.
The day he came was a beautiful bright, cool one in an August. A touring car brought him. They put him down on our corner, meaning to lose him, but he crawled under the car, and they had to prod him out and throw stones before they could drive on. So that when I came home I found, with his mistress-elect, a sort of potbellied bundle of tarry oakum, caked with mud, panting convulsively still from fright, and showing the whites of uncommonly liquid brown eyes and a pink tongue. There was tennis that evening and he went along—I carried him over the railroad tracks; he gave us no trouble about the balls, but lay huddled under the bench where she sat, and shivered if a man came near him.
The day he arrived was a bright, cool August day. A touring car dropped him off. They left him at our corner, trying to get rid of him, but he crawled under the car, and they had to poke him out and throw stones before they could drive away. So that when I came home, I found, with his future owner, a kind of chubby bundle of matted oakum, covered in mud, still panting from fear, with wide, unusually liquid brown eyes and a pink tongue hanging out. There was tennis that evening and he came along—I carried him over the railroad tracks; he didn’t bother us with the balls, but curled up under the bench where she sat, trembling if a man got too close.
That night he got chop bones and she got a sensible homily on the unwisdom of feeding strays, and he was left outdoors. He slept on the mat. The second morning we thought he had gone. The third, he was back, wagging approval of us and intent to stay, which seemed to leave no choice but to take him in. We had fun over names. "Jellywaggles," suggested from next door, was undeniably descriptive. "Rags" fitted, or "Toby" or "Nig"—but they had a colored maid next door; finally we called him "Nibs," and soon his tail would answer to it.
That night he got leftover bones and she gave a practical lecture on how unwise it is to feed stray animals, leaving him outside. He slept on the mat. The second morning we thought he had left. By the third, he was back, happily wagging his tail and clearly wanting to stay, which meant we had no choice but to take him in. We had fun coming up with names. “Jellywaggles,” suggested from next door, was definitely fitting. “Rags” worked, or “Toby” or “Nig”—but they had a Black maid next door; in the end, we settled on “Nibs,” and soon he responded to it with his tail.
Cleaned up—scrubbed, the insoluble matted locks clipped from his coat, his trampish collar replaced with a new one bearing a license tag—he was far from being unpresentable. A vet. once opined that for a mongrel he was a good dog, that a black cocker mother had thrown her cap over Scottish mills, so to speak. This analysis accounted for him perfectly. Always, depending on the moment's mood, he was either terrier or spaniel, the snap and scrap and perk of the one alternating with the gentle snuggling indolence of the other.
Cleaned up—scrubbed, the tangled, unmanageable fur clipped from his coat, his shabby collar replaced with a new one that had a license tag—he was far from looking unkempt. A vet once commented that for a mixed breed, he was a good dog, saying that a black cocker mother had thrown her hat over Scottish mills, so to speak. This description fit him perfectly. Depending on the mood of the moment, he was either a feisty terrier or a laid-back spaniel, the lively energy of one alternating with the gentle, lazy cuddling of the other.
As terrier he would dig furiously by the hour after a field mouse; as spaniel he would "read" the breeze with the best nose among the dog folk of our neighborhood, or follow a trail quite well. I know there was retrieving blood. A year ago May he caught and brought me, not doing the least injury, an oriole that probably had flown against a wire and was struggling disabled in the grass.
As a terrier, he would dig furiously for hours after a field mouse; as a spaniel, he would sniff the breeze like the best dog in the neighborhood or follow a trail pretty well. I know he had some retrieving instincts. Last May, he caught and brought me an oriole that had likely flown into a wire and was struggling in the grass, without hurting it at all.
Nibbie was shabby-genteel black, sunburnt as to the mustache, grizzled as to the raggy fringe on his haunches. He had a white stock and shirt-frill and a white fore paw. The brown eyes full of heart were the best point. His body coat was rough Scottish worsted, the little black pate was cotton-soft like shoddy, and the big black ears were genuine spaniel silk. As a terrier he held them up smartly and carried a plumy fishhook of a tail; as a spaniel the ears drooped and the tail swung meekly as if in apology for never having been clipped. The other day when we had to say good-by to him each of us cut one silky tuft from an ear, very much as we had so often when he'd been among the burdocks in the field where the garden is.
Nibbie was a scruffy but charming black dog, sunburned on his mustache and graying around the frayed edges of his hind legs. He wore a white collar and frilly shirt and had a white front paw. His brown eyes were full of warmth and were his best feature. His body fur was rough like Scottish wool, the small patch of black on his head was soft like cotton, and his large black ears had the texture of real spaniel silk. As a terrier, he held his ears up proudly and had a bushy tail that looked like a fishhook; as a spaniel, his ears hung down and his tail swayed gently, as if to apologize for never having been groomed. Just the other day, when we had to say goodbye, each of us snipped a silky tuft from one of his ears, just like we often did when he’d been rolling in the burdocks in the field by the garden.
Burrs were by no means Nibbie's only failing. In flea time it seemed hardly possible that a dog of his size could sustain his population. We finally found a true flea bane, but, deserted one day, he was populous again the next. They don't relish every human; me they did; I used to storm at him for it, and he used, between spasms of scratching, to listen admiringly and wag. We think he supposed his tormentors were winged insects, for he sought refuge in dark clothes-closets where a flying imp wouldn't logically come.
Burrs weren't Nibbie's only issue. During flea season, it seemed impossible for a dog of his size to handle his flea problems. We eventually found a real flea killer, but one day he was alone, and the next day he was infested again. They didn’t bite every human, but they sure liked me; I would yell at him for it, and in between scratching fits, he would listen with admiration and wag his tail. We think he believed his tormentors were flying insects because he would hide in dark closets where a flying pest wouldn’t logically go.
He was wilful, insisted on landing in laps when their makers wanted to read. He would make advances to visitors who were polite about him. He would get up on the living-room table, why and how, heaven knows, finding his opportunity when we were out of the house, and taking care to be upstairs on a bed—white, grimeable coverlets preferred—by the time we had the front door open; I used to slip up to the porch and catch through a window the diving flourish of his sinful tail.
He was stubborn and insisted on landing in laps when his owners wanted to read. He would make advances to visitors who were nice to him. He would get up on the living room table—how he managed it, I have no idea—finding his chance when we were out of the house, and making sure to be upstairs on a bed—preferably with white, easily dirtied bedding—by the time we opened the front door; I used to sneak up to the porch and catch a glimpse through the window of his mischievous tail swooping down.
One of his faults must have been a neurosis really. He led a hard life before we took him in, as witnessed the game hind leg that made him sit up side-saddle fashion, and two such scars on his back as boiling hot grease might have made. And something especially cruel had been done to him when asleep, for if you bent over him napping or in his bed he would half rouse and growl, and sometimes snap blindly. (We dreaded exuberant visiting children.) Two or three experiments I hate to remember now convinced me that it couldn't be whipped out of him, and once wide awake he was sure to be perplexedly apologetic.
One of his issues must have been a kind of neurosis. He had a tough life before we took him in, as shown by the way he sat with his hind leg propped up and the two scars on his back that looked like they were caused by boiling hot grease. Something particularly cruel must have happened to him while he was asleep because if you leaned over him while he was napping or in his bed, he would stir slightly and growl, and sometimes snap without seeing. (We were always worried about overly enthusiastic visiting kids.) A few experiments that I hate to think about now made it clear that it couldn't be beaten out of him, and once he was fully awake, he would definitely seem confused and apologetic.
He was spoiled. That was our doing. We babied him abominably—he was, for two years, the only subject we had for such malpractice. He had more foolish names than Wogg, that dog of Mrs. Stevenson's, and heard more Little Language than Stella ever did, reciprocating by kissing proffered ears in his doggy way. Once he had brightened up after his arrival, he showed himself ready to take an ell whenever we gave an inch, and he was always taking them, and never paying penalties. He had conscience enough to be sly. I remember the summer evening we stepped outside for just an instant, and came back to find a curious groove across the butter, on the dining table, and an ever-so-innocent Nibbie in a chair in the next room.
He was spoiled. That was our fault. We pampered him ridiculously—he was, for two years, the only one we had to indulge like that. He had more silly nicknames than Wogg, Mrs. Stevenson’s dog, and heard more baby talk than Stella ever did, responding by lovingly kissing outstretched ears in his own doggy way. Once he perked up after arriving, he proved he was ready to take advantage whenever we gave him an inch, and he was always taking them and never facing any consequences. He was clever enough to be sneaky. I remember one summer evening when we stepped outside for just a moment, and when we came back, we found a strange groove in the butter on the dining table, with an oh-so-innocent Nibbie sitting in a chair in the next room.
While we were at the table he was generally around it, bulldozing for tid-bits—I fear he had reason to know that this would work. One fortnight when his Missie was away he slept on his Old Man's bed (we had dropped titles of dignity with him by then) and he rang the welkin hourly, answering far-away dog friends, and occasionally came north to lollop my face with tender solicitude, just like the fool nurse in the story, waking the patient up to ask if he was sleeping well.
While we were at the table, he was usually right there, pushing for scraps—I suspect he knew this would be effective. During one week when his Missie was away, he slept on his Old Man's bed (we had dropped any formal titles with him by that point) and he barked loudly every hour, responding to distant dog friends, and occasionally came over to nuzzle my face with concern, just like the silly nurse in the story, waking the patient up to check if he was sleeping well.
More recently, when a beruffled basket was waiting, he developed an alarming trick of stealing in there to try it, so I fitted that door with a hook, insuring a crack impervious to dogs. And the other night I had to take the hook, now useless, off; we couldn't stand hearing it jingle. He adopted the junior member on first sight and sniff of him, by the way; would look on beaming as proudly as if he'd hatched him.
More recently, when a ruffled basket was waiting, he picked up a concerning habit of sneaking in there to check it out, so I added a hook to that door to keep it secure from dogs. And the other night I had to remove the now useless hook; we couldn't handle the jingling noise anymore. He took to the new member at first sight and sniff, by the way; he looked on, beaming with pride as if he had hatched him himself.
The last of his iniquities arose from a valor that lacked its better part, an absurd mixture of Falstaff and bantam rooster. At the critical point he'd back out of a fuss with a dog of his own size. But let a police dog, an Airedale, a St. Bernard, or a big ugly cur appear and Nibbie was all around him, blackguarding him unendurably. It was lucky that the big dogs in our neighborhood were patient. And he never would learn about automobiles. Usually tried to tackle them head on, often stopped cars with merciful drivers. When the car wouldn't stop, luck would save him by a fraction of an inch. I couldn't spank that out of him either. We had really been expecting what finally happened for two years.
The last of his wrongdoings came from a bravery that was missing its crucial element, a ridiculous mix of Falstaff and a small, cocky rooster. When it really mattered, he'd shy away from a fight with a dog his own size. But as soon as a police dog, an Airedale, a St. Bernard, or a big, ugly mutt showed up, Nibbie was all over him, hurling insults in the most unbearable way. Thankfully, the big dogs in our neighborhood were understanding. He never quite figured out cars either. He usually tried to confront them head-on, often stopping vehicles with kind drivers. When the car didn't stop, luck would save him by mere inches. I couldn't beat that out of him either. We had really been anticipating what finally happened for two years.
That's about all. Too much, I am afraid. A decent fate made it quick the other night, and clean and close at hand, in fact, on the same street corner where once a car had left the small scapegrace for us. We tell ourselves how glad we are it happened as it did, instead of an agonal ending such as many of his people come to. We tell ourselves we couldn't have had him for ever in any event; that some day, for the junior member's sake, we shall get another dog. We keep telling ourselves these things, and talking with animation on other topics. The muzzle, the leash, the drinking dish are hidden, the last muddy paw track swept up, the nose smudges washed off the favorite front window pane.
That's about it. Too much, I’m afraid. A decent fate made it quick the other night, and clean and close at hand, in fact, on the same street corner where once a car had dropped the little troublemaker off for us. We tell ourselves how glad we are it happened the way it did, instead of a long, painful ending like many of his kind come to. We remind ourselves we couldn’t have kept him forever anyway; that someday, for the sake of the junior member, we’ll get another dog. We keep telling ourselves these things and chatting animatedly about other topics. The muzzle, the leash, the water bowl are hidden, the last muddy paw prints cleaned up, and the nose smudges wiped off the favorite front window.
THE FIFTY-FIRST DRAGON
By Heywood Broun
Heywood Broun, who has risen rapidly through the ranks of newspaper honor from sporting reporter and war correspondent to one of the most highly regarded dramatic and literary critics in the country, is another of these Harvard men, but, as far as this book is concerned, the last of them. Broun graduated from Harvard in 1910; was several years on the New York Tribune, and is now on the World.
Heywood Broun, who has quickly moved up the ranks of newspaper prestige from sports reporter and war correspondent to one of the most respected dramatic and literary critics in the country, is another one of these Harvard alums, but, for the purposes of this book, the last of them. Broun graduated from Harvard in 1910, spent several years at the New York Tribune, and is now with the World.
There is no more substantially gifted newspaper man in his field; his beautifully spontaneous humor and drollery are counterbalanced by a fine imaginative sensitiveness and a remarkable power in the fable or allegorical essay, such as the one here reprinted. His book, Seeing Things at Night, is only the first-fruit of truly splendid possibilities. If I may be allowed to prophesy, thus hazarding all, I will say that Heywood Broun is likely, in the next ten or fifteen years, to do as fine work, both imaginative and critical, as any living American of his era.
There’s no one more talented in his field than this newspaper columnist; his wonderfully spontaneous humor and wit are balanced out by a keen imaginative sensitivity and an impressive skill in writing fables or allegorical essays, like the one included here. His book, Seeing Things at Night, is just the beginning of truly amazing potential. If I may take a chance and make a prediction, I believe that Heywood Broun is likely to produce exceptional work, both imaginative and critical, worthy of being compared to any contemporary American over the next ten to fifteen years.
OF all the pupils at the knight school Gawaine le Cœur-Hardy was among the least promising. He was tall and sturdy, but his instructors soon discovered that he lacked spirit. He would hide in the woods when the jousting class was called, although his companions and members of the faculty sought to appeal to his better nature by shouting to him to come out and break his neck like a man. Even when they told him that the lances were padded, the horses no more than ponies and the field unusually soft for late autumn, Gawaine refused to grow enthusiastic. The Headmaster and the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce were discussing the case one spring afternoon and the Assistant Professor could see no remedy but expulsion.
OF all the students at the knight school, Gawaine le Cœur-Hardy was one of the least promising. He was tall and strong, but his teachers quickly realized that he lacked drive. He would hide in the woods when it was time for jousting class, even though his friends and faculty members tried to coax him out by shouting for him to come out and take the risk like a man. Even when they assured him that the lances were padded, the horses were just ponies, and the ground was unusually soft for late autumn, Gawaine still wouldn't get excited. The Headmaster and the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce were discussing his situation one spring afternoon, and the Assistant Professor could see no solution other than expulsion.
"No," said the Headmaster, as he looked out at the purple hills which ringed the school, "I think I'll train him to slay dragons."
"No," said the Headmaster, looking out at the purple hills surrounding the school, "I think I'll train him to slay dragons."
"He might be killed," objected the Assistant Professor.
"He might get killed," the Assistant Professor disagreed.
"So he might," replied the Headmaster brightly, but he added, more soberly, "we must consider the greater good. We are responsible for the formation of this lad's character."
"So he might," replied the Headmaster cheerfully, but he added, more seriously, "we need to think about the bigger picture. We're responsible for shaping this young man's character."
"Are the dragons particularly bad this year?" interrupted the Assistant Professor. This was characteristic. He always seemed restive when the head of the school began to talk ethics and the ideals of the institution.
"Are the dragons especially bad this year?" interrupted the Assistant Professor. This was typical of him. He always seemed uneasy when the head of the school started discussing ethics and the ideals of the institution.
"I've never known them worse," replied the Headmaster. "Up in the hills to the south last week they killed a number of peasants, two cows and a prize pig. And if this dry spell holds there's no telling when they may start a forest fire simply by breathing around indiscriminately."
"I've never seen them worse," replied the Headmaster. "Last week, up in the hills to the south, they killed several peasants, two cows, and a prize pig. And if this dry spell keeps up, there's no telling when they might start a forest fire just by carelessly breathing around."
"Would any refund on the tuition fee be necessary in case of an accident to young Cœur-Hardy?"
"Would any refund on the tuition fee be needed in case of an accident involving young Cœur-Hardy?"
"That's a good idea," said the Professor. "Sometimes they work wonders."
"That's a great idea," said the Professor. "Sometimes they do amazing things."
From that day on Gawaine specialized in dragons. His course included both theory and practice. In the morning there were long lectures on the history, anatomy, manners and customs of dragons. Gawaine did not distinguish himself in these studies. He had a marvelously versatile gift for forgetting things. In the afternoon he showed to better advantage, for then he would go down to the South Meadow and practise with a battle-ax. In this exercise he was truly impressive, for he had enormous strength as well as speed and grace. He even developed a deceptive display of ferocity. Old alumni say that it was a thrilling sight to see Gawaine charging across the field toward the dummy paper dragon which had been set up for his practice. As he ran he would brandish his ax and shout "A murrain on thee!" or some other vivid bit of campus slang. It never took him more than one stroke to behead the dummy dragon.
From that day on, Gawaine focused on dragons. His course included both theory and practice. Mornings were filled with long lectures on the history, anatomy, behavior, and customs of dragons. Gawaine didn’t excel in those studies. He had an incredible ability to forget things. In the afternoons, he shone more brightly, as he would head down to the South Meadow to practice with a battle ax. In this activity, he was truly impressive, possessing both immense strength and speed, along with grace. He even developed a skillful display of ferocity. Former students say it was an exciting sight to watch Gawaine charging across the field toward the dummy paper dragon set up for his practice. As he ran, he would wave his ax and shout, "A pox on you!" or some other colorful bit of campus slang. It never took him more than one swing to behead the dummy dragon.
Gradually his task was made more difficult. Paper gave way to papier-mâché and finally to wood, but even the toughest of these dummy dragons had no terrors for Gawaine. One sweep of the ax always did the business. There were those who said that when the practice was protracted until dusk and the dragons threw long, fantastic shadows across the meadow Gawaine did not charge so impetuously nor shout so loudly. It is possible there was malice in this charge. At any rate, the Headmaster decided by the end of June that it was time for the test. Only the night before a dragon had come close to the school grounds and had eaten some of the lettuce from the garden. The faculty decided that Gawaine was ready. They gave him a diploma and a new battle-ax and the Headmaster summoned him to a private conference.
Gradually, his task became more challenging. Paper was replaced by papier-mâché, and eventually by wood, but even the toughest of these dummy dragons didn't scare Gawaine. One swing of the ax always did the trick. Some people said that when the practice went on until dusk and the dragons cast long, eerie shadows across the meadow, Gawaine didn't charge as recklessly or shout as loudly. It’s possible there was some malice in this charge. At any rate, the Headmaster concluded by the end of June that it was time for the test. Just the night before, a dragon had come close to the school grounds and had eaten some of the lettuce from the garden. The faculty decided Gawaine was ready. They gave him a diploma and a new battle-ax, and the Headmaster called him in for a private meeting.
"Sit down," said the Headmaster. "Have a cigarette."
"Sit down," said the Headmaster. "Have a smoke."
Gawaine hesitated.
Gawaine paused.
"Oh, I know it's against the rules," said the Headmaster. "But after all, you have received your preliminary degree. You are no longer a boy. You are a man. To-morrow you will go out into the world, the great world of achievement."
"Oh, I know it's against the rules," said the Headmaster. "But you’ve received your preliminary degree. You’re no longer a boy. You’re a man. Tomorrow you’ll step out into the world, the vast world of achievement."
Gawaine took a cigarette. The Headmaster offered him a match, but he produced one of his own and began to puff away with a dexterity which quite amazed the principal.
Gawaine lit a cigarette. The Headmaster offered him a match, but he pulled one of his own from his pocket and started smoking with a skill that really impressed the principal.
"Here you have learned the theories of life," continued the Headmaster, resuming the thread of his discourse, "but after all, life is not a matter of theories. Life is a matter of facts. It calls on the young and the old alike to face these facts, even though they are hard and sometimes unpleasant. Your problem, for example, is to slay dragons."
"Here you’ve learned the theories of life," the Headmaster continued, picking up where he left off, "but ultimately, life isn’t just about theories. Life is about facts. It challenges both the young and the old to confront these facts, even when they’re tough and sometimes uncomfortable. Your challenge, for instance, is to slay dragons."
"They say that those dragons down in the south wood are five hundred feet long," ventured Gawaine, timorously.
"They say the dragons in the south woods are five hundred feet long," Gawaine said nervously.
"Stuff and nonsense!" said the Headmaster. "The curate saw one last week from the top of Arthur's Hill. The dragon was sunning himself down in the valley. The curate didn't have an opportunity to look at him very long because he felt it was his duty to hurry back to make a report to me. He said the monster, or shall I say, the big lizard?—wasn't an inch over two hundred feet. But the size has nothing at all to do with it. You'll find the big ones even easier than the little ones. They're far slower on their feet and less aggressive, I'm told. Besides, before you go I'm going to equip you in such fashion that you need have no fear of all the dragons in the world."
"That's ridiculous!" said the Headmaster. "The curate spotted one last week from the top of Arthur's Hill. The dragon was lounging in the valley. He didn’t get a good look at it because he felt it was his responsibility to rush back and report to me. He mentioned that the creature, or should I say, the giant lizard?—wasn’t more than two hundred feet long. But size isn’t really the issue. You’ll find the big ones easier to handle than the smaller ones. They move much slower and are less aggressive, I’ve been told. Besides, before you leave, I’m going to equip you in such a way that you won’t have to fear any of the dragons in the world."
"I'd like an enchanted cap," said Gawaine.
"I want a magical hat," said Gawaine.
"What's that?" answered the Headmaster, testily.
"What's that?" the Headmaster replied, irritably.
"A cap to make me disappear," explained Gawaine.
"A cap to make me vanish," explained Gawaine.
The Headmaster laughed indulgently. "You mustn't believe all those old wives' stories," he said. "There isn't any such thing. A cap to make you disappear, indeed! What would you do with it? You haven't even appeared yet. Why, my boy, you could walk from here to London, and nobody would so much as look at you. You're nobody. You couldn't be more invisible than that."
The Headmaster chuckled kindly. "You shouldn’t buy into those old wives' tales," he said. "There’s no such thing. A cap that makes you disappear, really! What would you do with that? You haven’t even made an impression yet. Honestly, my boy, you could walk from here to London, and not a single person would even notice you. You’re nobody. You couldn’t be more invisible than that."
Gawaine seemed dangerously close to a relapse into his old habit of whimpering. The Headmaster reassured him: "Don't worry; I'll give you something much better than an enchanted cap. I'm going to give you a magic word. All you have to do is to repeat this magic charm once and no dragon can possibly harm a hair of your head. You can cut off his head at your leisure."
Gawaine looked like he might start whining again. The Headmaster comforted him: "Don't worry; I'll give you something way better than a magical hat. I'm going to give you a magic word. All you need to do is say this magic word once, and no dragon can harm you. You can chop off its head whenever you want."
He took a heavy book from the shelf behind his desk and began to run through it. "Sometimes," he said, "the charm is a whole phrase or even a sentence. I might, for instance, give you 'To make the'—No, that might not do. I think a single word would be best for dragons."
He grabbed a heavy book from the shelf behind his desk and started flipping through it. "Sometimes," he said, "the charm is a whole phrase or even a sentence. I could, for example, give you 'To make the'—No, that probably won't work. I think a single word would be better for dragons."
"A short word," suggested Gawaine.
"A brief word," suggested Gawaine.
"It can't be too short or it wouldn't be potent. There isn't so much hurry as all that. Here's a splendid magic word: 'Rumplesnitz.' Do you think you can learn that?"
"It can't be too short or it wouldn’t be powerful. There’s no need to rush. Here’s a great magic word: 'Rumplesnitz.' Think you can learn that?"
Toward morning Gawaine seemed resigned to his career. At daybreak the Headmaster saw him to the edge of the forest and pointed him to the direction in which he should proceed. About a mile away to the southwest a cloud of steam hovered over an open meadow in the woods and the Headmaster assured Gawaine that under the steam he would find a dragon. Gawaine went forward slowly. He wondered whether it would be best to approach the dragon on the run as he did in his practice in the South Meadow or to walk slowly toward him, shouting "Rumplesnitz" all the way.
Toward morning, Gawaine seemed to accept his fate. At daybreak, the Headmaster walked him to the edge of the forest and pointed out the direction he should take. About a mile to the southwest, a cloud of steam hung over an open meadow in the woods, and the Headmaster assured Gawaine that beneath that steam, he would find a dragon. Gawaine moved forward slowly, wondering if it would be better to charge at the dragon like he practiced in the South Meadow or to walk slowly toward it, shouting "Rumplesnitz" the whole time.
The problem was decided for him. No sooner had he come to the fringe of the meadow than the dragon spied him and began to charge. It was a large dragon and yet it seemed decidedly aggressive in spite of the Headmaster's statement to the contrary. As the dragon charged it released huge clouds of hissing steam through its nostrils. It was almost as if a gigantic teapot had gone mad. The dragon came forward so fast and Gawaine was so frightened that he had time to say "Rumplesnitz" only once. As he said it, he swung his battle-ax and off popped the head of the dragon. Gawaine had to admit that it was even easier to kill a real dragon than a wooden one if only you said "Rumplesnitz."
The decision was made for him. No sooner had he reached the edge of the meadow than the dragon spotted him and charged. It was a big dragon, and yet it seemed really aggressive, despite what the Headmaster had said. As the dragon charged, it let out huge clouds of hissing steam from its nostrils. It was like a giant teapot had gone crazy. The dragon came at him so quickly, and Gawaine was so scared that he only had time to say "Rumplesnitz" once. As he said it, he swung his battle-ax, and off came the dragon's head. Gawaine had to admit that it was even easier to kill a real dragon than a wooden one if you just said "Rumplesnitz."
Gawaine brought the ears home and a small section of the tail. His school mates and the faculty made much of him, but the Headmaster wisely kept him from being spoiled by insisting that he go on with his work. Every clear day Gawaine rose at dawn and went out to kill dragons. The Headmaster kept him at home when it rained, because he said the woods were damp and unhealthy at such times and that he didn't want the boy to run needless risks. Few good days passed in which Gawaine failed to get a dragon. On one particularly fortunate day he killed three, a husband and wife and a visiting relative. Gradually he developed a technique. Pupils who sometimes watched him from the hill-tops a long way off said that he often allowed the dragon to come within a few feet before he said "Rumplesnitz." He came to say it with a mocking sneer. Occasionally he did stunts. Once when an excursion party from London was watching him he went into action with his right hand tied behind his back. The dragon's head came off just as easily.
Gawaine brought home the dragon's ears and a small part of the tail. His classmates and teachers praised him, but the Headmaster wisely made sure he stayed grounded by insisting that he continue with his studies. Every clear day, Gawaine woke up at dawn and went out to hunt dragons. The Headmaster kept him home when it rained, saying that the woods were damp and unhealthy during such weather and he didn't want the boy to take unnecessary risks. Rarely did a good day go by without Gawaine defeating a dragon. On one particularly lucky day, he killed three: a husband, a wife, and a visiting relative. Over time, he developed a technique. Students who sometimes watched him from far-off hilltops said that he often let the dragon get within just a few feet before he exclaimed "Rumplesnitz." He started to say it with a mocking sneer. Occasionally, he performed stunts. Once, when a group from London was watching him, he sprang into action with his right hand tied behind his back. The dragon's head came off just as easily.
As Gawaine's record of killings mounted higher the Headmaster found it impossible to keep him completely in hand. He fell into the habit of stealing out at night and engaging in long drinking bouts at the village tavern. It was after such a debauch that he rose a little before dawn one fine August morning and started out after his fiftieth dragon. His head was heavy and his mind sluggish. He was heavy in other respects as well, for he had adopted the somewhat vulgar practice of wearing his medals, ribbons and all, when he went out dragon hunting. The decorations began on his chest and ran all the way down to his abdomen. They must have weighed at least eight pounds.
As Gawaine's list of kills grew longer, the Headmaster found it impossible to keep him under control. He started to sneak out at night and spend long hours drinking at the village tavern. After one of those benders, he woke up just before dawn one beautiful August morning and set off to hunt his fiftieth dragon. His head felt heavy and his mind was slow. He was also weighed down in other ways, as he had picked up the rather tacky habit of wearing his medals and ribbons when he went out to hunt dragons. The decorations covered his chest and went all the way down to his stomach. They must have weighed at least eight pounds.
Gawaine found a dragon in the same meadow where he had killed the first one. It was a fair-sized dragon, but evidently an old one. Its face was wrinkled and Gawaine thought he had never seen so hideous a countenance. Much to the lad's disgust, the monster refused to charge and Gawaine was obliged to walk toward him. He whistled as he went. The dragon regarded him hopelessly, but craftily. Of course it had heard of Gawaine. Even when the lad raised his battle-ax the dragon made no move. It knew that there was no salvation in the quickest thrust of the head, for it had been informed that this hunter was protected by an enchantment. It merely waited, hoping something would turn up. Gawaine raised the battle-ax and suddenly lowered it again. He had grown very pale and he trembled violently. The dragon suspected a trick. "What's the matter?" it asked, with false solicitude.
Gawaine found a dragon in the same meadow where he had killed the first one. It was a decent-sized dragon, but clearly an old one. Its face was wrinkled, and Gawaine thought he had never seen such a hideous face. Much to the boy's annoyance, the monster refused to charge, so Gawaine had to walk toward it. He whistled as he approached. The dragon watched him with a mix of hopelessness and cunning. Of course, it had heard of Gawaine. Even when the boy raised his battle-ax, the dragon didn’t budge. It knew there was no escape from the quickest blow, as it had been told that this hunter was protected by a spell. It simply waited, hoping something would change. Gawaine raised the battle-ax and suddenly lowered it again. He had turned very pale and trembled violently. The dragon suspected a trick. “What’s wrong?” it asked, with feigned concern.
"I've forgotten the magic word," stammered Gawaine.
"I've forgotten the magic word," Gawaine said awkwardly.
Gawaine was so helpless with terror that the dragon's confidence rose immeasurably and it could not resist the temptation to show off a bit.
Gawaine was so paralyzed with fear that the dragon's confidence soared, and it couldn't help but show off a little.
"Could I possibly be of any assistance?" it asked. "What's the first letter of the magic word?"
"Can I help you with anything?" it asked. "What's the first letter of the magic word?"
"It begins with an 'r,'" said Gawaine weakly.
"It starts with an 'r,'" Gawaine said faintly.
"Let's see," mused the dragon, "that doesn't tell us much, does it? What sort of a word is this? Is it an epithet, do you think?"
"Let’s see," the dragon thought aloud, "that doesn’t really tell us much, does it? What kind of word is this? Is it an epithet, do you think?"
Gawaine could do no more than nod.
Gawaine could just nod.
"Why, of course," exclaimed the dragon, "reactionary Republican."
"Of course," the dragon said, "reactionary Republican."
Gawaine shook his head.
Gawaine shook his head.
"Well, then," said the dragon, "we'd better get down to business. Will you surrender?"
"Alright then," said the dragon, "let's get to work. Will you give up?"
With the suggestion of a compromise Gawaine mustered up enough courage to speak.
With the suggestion of a compromise, Gawaine gathered enough courage to speak.
"What will you do if I surrender?" he asked.
"What will you do if I give up?" he asked.
"Why, I'll eat you," said the dragon.
"Why, I'll eat you," said the dragon.
"And if I don't surrender?"
"And what if I don't give up?"
"I'll eat you just the same."
"I'll eat you just the same."
"It does to me," said the dragon with a smile. "I'd rather you didn't surrender. You'd taste much better if you didn't."
"It does to me," said the dragon with a smile. "I'd rather you not give up. You'd taste way better if you didn't."
The dragon waited for a long time for Gawaine to ask "Why?" but the boy was too frightened to speak. At last the dragon had to give the explanation without his cue line. "You see," he said, "if you don't surrender you'll taste better because you'll die game."
The dragon waited for a long time for Gawaine to ask "Why?" but the boy was too scared to say anything. Finally, the dragon had to explain without his prompt. "You see," he said, "if you don't give up, you'll taste better because you'll die bravely."
This was an old and ancient trick of the dragon's. By means of some such quip he was accustomed to paralyze his victims with laughter and then to destroy them. Gawaine was sufficiently paralyzed as it was, but laughter had no part in his helplessness. With the last word of the joke the dragon drew back his head and struck. In that second there flashed into the mind of Gawaine the magic word "Rumplesnitz," but there was no time to say it. There was time only to strike and, without a word, Gawaine met the onrush of the dragon with a full swing. He put all his back and shoulders into it. The impact was terrific and the head of the dragon flew away almost a hundred yards and landed in a thicket.
This was an old trick of the dragon's. With a quip like this, he would usually leave his victims paralyzed with laughter before he destroyed them. Gawaine was already paralyzed, but it wasn’t due to laughter. As the dragon finished his joke, he pulled back his head to attack. In that moment, the magic word "Rumplesnitz" flashed in Gawaine's mind, but he didn’t have time to say it. All he could do was respond, and without saying a word, Gawaine swung with all his strength. He put everything into it, and the impact was incredible; the dragon's head flew almost a hundred yards and landed in a thicket.
Gawaine did not remain frightened very long after the death of the dragon. His mood was one of wonder. He was enormously puzzled. He cut off the ears of the monster almost in a trance. Again and again he thought to himself, "I didn't say 'Rumplesnitz'!" He was sure of that and yet there was no question that he had killed the dragon. In fact, he had never killed one so utterly. Never before had he driven a head for anything like the same distance. Twenty-five yards was perhaps his best previous record. All the way back to the knight school he kept rumbling about in his mind seeking an explanation for what had occurred. He went to the Headmaster immediately and after closing the door told him what had happened. "I didn't say 'Rumplesnitz,'" he explained with great earnestness.
Gawaine didn't stay scared for long after the dragon died. He felt a sense of wonder. He was hugely confused. Almost in a daze, he cut off the monster's ears. Again and again, he thought to himself, "I didn't say 'Rumplesnitz'!" He was sure of it, yet there was no doubt that he had killed the dragon. In fact, he had never killed one so completely. He had never sent a head flying nearly that far before. Twenty-five yards had been his best record until now. All the way back to knight school, he kept replaying what had happened in his mind, trying to find an explanation. He went straight to the Headmaster and, after closing the door, told him what had happened. "I didn't say 'Rumplesnitz,'" he explained earnestly.
The Headmaster laughed. "I'm glad you've found out," he said. "It makes you ever so much more of a hero. Don't you see that? Now you know that it was you who killed all these dragons and not that foolish little word 'Rumplesnitz.'"
The Headmaster laughed. "I'm glad you figured it out," he said. "It makes you so much more of a hero. Don't you see that? Now you know it was you who killed all these dragons, not that silly little word 'Rumplesnitz.'"
Gawaine frowned. "Then it wasn't a magic word after all?" he asked.
Gawaine frowned. "So, it wasn't a magic word after all?" he asked.
"Of course not," said the Headmaster, "you ought to be too old for such foolishness. There isn't any such thing as a magic word."
"Of course not," said the Headmaster, "you should be too old for that kind of nonsense. There’s no such thing as a magic word."
"But you told me it was magic," protested Gawaine. "You said it was magic and now you say it isn't."
"But you told me it was magic," Gawaine protested. "You said it was magic, and now you say it isn't."
Gawaine surprised the Headmaster by his attitude. He was obviously distressed by the explanation. He interrupted a long philosophic and ethical discourse by the Headmaster with, "If I hadn't of hit 'em all mighty hard and fast any one of 'em might have crushed me like a, like a—" He fumbled for a word.
Gawaine surprised the Headmaster with his attitude. He was clearly upset by the explanation. He interrupted a lengthy philosophical and ethical discussion by the Headmaster with, "If I hadn't hit them all really hard and fast, any one of them could have crushed me like a, like a—" He stumbled over his words.
"Egg shell," suggested the Headmaster.
"Eggshell," suggested the Headmaster.
"Like a egg shell," assented Gawaine, and he said it many times. All through the evening meal people who sat near him heard him muttering, "Like a egg shell, like a egg shell."
"Like an eggshell," agreed Gawaine, and he repeated it several times. Throughout the dinner, those seated near him heard him mumbling, "Like an eggshell, like an eggshell."
The next day was clear, but Gawaine did not get up at dawn. Indeed, it was almost noon when the Headmaster found him cowering in bed, with the clothes pulled over his head. The principal called the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce, and together they dragged the boy toward the forest.
The next day was clear, but Gawaine didn’t wake up at dawn. In fact, it was almost noon when the Headmaster found him hiding under the covers in bed. The principal called the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce, and together they pulled the boy toward the forest.
"He'll be all right as soon as he gets a couple more dragons under his belt," explained the Headmaster.
"He'll be fine once he has a few more dragons experience," the Headmaster explained.
The Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce agreed. "It would be a shame to stop such a fine run," he said. "Why, counting that one yesterday, he's killed fifty dragons."
The Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce nodded. "It would be a shame to end such a great streak," he said. "With that one yesterday, he's killed fifty dragons."
They pushed the boy into a thicket above which hung a meager cloud of steam. It was obviously quite a small dragon. But Gawaine did not come back that night or the next. In fact, he never came back. Some weeks afterward brave spirits from the school explored the thicket, but they could find nothing to remind them of Gawaine except the metal parts of his medals. Even the ribbons had been devoured.
They shoved the boy into a dense patch of bushes where a thin cloud of steam hung above. It was clearly some kind of small dragon. But Gawaine didn't return that night or the next. In fact, he never came back. A few weeks later, courageous students from the school checked out the thicket, but they found nothing that reminded them of Gawaine except for the metal pieces of his medals. Even the ribbons had been eaten.
The Headmaster and the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce agreed that it would be just as well not to tell the school how Gawaine had achieved his record and still less how he came to die. They held that it might have a bad effect on school spirit. Accordingly, Gawaine has lived in the memory of the school as its greatest hero. No visitor succeeds in leaving the building to-day without seeing a great shield which hangs on the wall of the dining hall. Fifty pairs of dragons' ears are mounted upon the shield and underneath in gilt letters is "Gawaine le Cœur-Hardy," followed by the simple inscription, "He killed fifty dragons." The record has never been equaled.
The Headmaster and the Assistant Professor of Pleasaunce decided it would be better not to tell the school how Gawaine achieved his record and even less how he died. They believed it might negatively impact school spirit. As a result, Gawaine has been remembered as the school's greatest hero. No visitor leaves the building today without noticing a large shield hanging on the dining hall wall. Fifty pairs of dragon ears are attached to the shield, and beneath it in gold letters is "Gawaine le Cœur-Hardy," followed by the simple inscription, "He killed fifty dragons." That record has never been matched.
The following typographical errors were corrected by the |
etext transcriber: |
wtihout malice=>without malice |
smooth and omnious=>smooth and ominous |
kinds words uttered=>kind words uttered |
It is cardinal rule=>It is (a) cardinal rule |
FOOTNOTES:
FOOTNOTES:
[A] A Personal Record.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ *A Personal Record.*
[B] William Sidney Porter, 1862-1910, son of Algernon Sidney Porter, physician, was born, bred, and meagerly educated in Greensboro, North Carolina. In Greensboro he was drug clerk; in Texas he was amateur ranchman, land-office clerk, editor, and bank teller. Convicted of misuse of bank funds on insufficient evidence (which he supplemented by the insanity of flight), he passed three years and three months in the Ohio State Penitentiary at Columbus. Release was the prelude to life in New York, to story-writing, to rapid and wide-spread fame. Latterly, his stories, published in New York journals and in book form, were consumed by the public with an avidity which his premature death, in 1910, scarcely checked. The pen-name, O. Henry, is almost certainly borrowed from a French chemist Etienne-Ossian Henry, whose abridged name he fell upon in his pharmacal researches. See the interesting "O. Henry Biography" by C. Alphonso Smith.
[B] William Sidney Porter, 1862-1910, son of Algernon Sidney Porter, a doctor, was born, raised, and minimally educated in Greensboro, North Carolina. In Greensboro, he worked as a drug store clerk; in Texas, he was an amateur rancher, a land-office clerk, an editor, and a bank teller. He was convicted of misusing bank funds based on weak evidence (which he tried to escape by claiming insanity) and spent three years and three months in the Ohio State Penitentiary in Columbus. His release marked the beginning of his life in New York, where he focused on writing stories, gaining quick and widespread fame. Later, his stories, published in New York magazines and as books, were eagerly consumed by the public, and his untimely death in 1910 barely slowed this popularity. The pen name O. Henry is likely taken from the French chemist Etienne-Ossian Henry, whose shortened name he came across during his pharmacy work. See the interesting "O. Henry Biography" by C. Alphonso Smith.
[C] O Henry's stories have been known to coincide with earlier work in a fashion which dims the novelty of the tale without clouding the originality of the author. I thought the brilliant "Harlem Tragedy" (in the "Trimmed Lamp") unique through sheer audacity, but the other day I found its motive repeated with singular exactness in Montesquieu's "Lettres Persanes" (Letter LI).
[C] O. Henry's stories have been known to echo earlier works in a way that reduces the novelty of the tale without affecting the originality of the author. I once thought the striking "Harlem Tragedy" (in the "Trimmed Lamp") was unique due to its sheer audacity, but recently I found its theme mirrored with impressive accuracy in Montesquieu's "Lettres Persanes" (Letter LI).
[D] "These views, as usual, pleased some more, others less; some chid and calumniated me, and laid it to me as a crime that I had dared to depart from the precepts and opinions of all Anatomists."—De Motu Cordis, chap. i.
[D] "As always, these opinions pleased some people more than others; some criticized and slandered me, accusing me of wrongdoing for daring to deviate from the teachings and beliefs of all anatomists."—De Motu Cordis, chap. i.
[E] This visit (in the early eighties) had another relish. The inn coffee-room had a copy of Mr. Freeman's book on the adjoining Cathedral, and this was copiously annotated in a beautiful and scholarly hand, but in a most virulent spirit. "Why can't you call things by their plain names?" (in reference to the historian's Macaulayesque periphrases) etc. I have often wondered who the annotator was.
[E] This visit (in the early eighties) had a different flavor. The inn's coffee room had a copy of Mr. Freeman's book about the nearby Cathedral, and it was filled with extensive annotations in a beautiful, scholarly handwriting, but with a very harsh tone. "Why can't you just call things what they are?" (referring to the historian's Macaulayesque circumlocutions) etc. I’ve often wondered who wrote the notes.
[F] When I went up this March to help man the last ditch for Greek, I happened to mention "Archdeacon": and my interlocutor told me that he believed no college now brewed within its walls. After the defeat, I thought of the stages of the Decline and Fall of Things: and how a sad but noble ode might be written (by the right man) on the Fates of Greek and Beer at Oxford. He would probably refer in the first strophe to the close of the Eumenides; in its antistrophe to Mr. Swinburne's great adaptation thereof in regard to Carlyle and Newman; while the epode and any reduplication of the parts would be occupied by showing how the departing entities were of no equivocal magnificence like the Eumenides themselves; of no flawed perfection (at least as it seemed to their poet) like the two great English writers, but wholly admirable and beneficent—too good for the generation who would banish them, and whom they banished.
[F] When I went up this March to help defend the last hope for Greek, I happened to mention "Archdeacon": and the person I was speaking with told me that he believed no college was brewing within its walls anymore. After the defeat, I thought about the stages of the Decline and Fall of Things: and how a sad but noble poem could be written (by the right person) about the fates of Greek and Beer at Oxford. He would probably mention in the first stanza the end of the Eumenides; in its counter-stanza to Mr. Swinburne's great adaptation related to Carlyle and Newman; while the epode and any repetition of the parts would focus on illustrating how the departing entities were of no ambiguous grandeur like the Eumenides themselves; of no flawed perfection (at least as it seemed to their poet) like the two great English writers, but entirely admirable and beneficial—too good for the generation that would exile them, and whom they in turn banished.
[G] This was one of the best illustrations of the old phrase, "a good pennyworth," that I ever knew for certain. I add the two last words because of a mysterious incident of my youth. I and one of my sisters were sitting at a window in a certain seaside place when we heard, both of us distinctly and repeatedly, this mystic street cry: "A bible and a pillow-case for a penny!" I rushed downstairs to secure this bargain, but the crier was now far off, and it was too late.
[G] This was one of the best examples of the old saying, "a good pennyworth," that I ever truly experienced. I mention the last two words because of a strange incident from my childhood. My sister and I were sitting at a window in a seaside town when we both clearly and repeatedly heard this mysterious street cry: "A bible and a pillowcase for a penny!" I rushed downstairs to grab this deal, but by then the vendor was long gone, and it was too late.
[H] By the way, are they still as good for flip at New College, Oxford, as they were in the days when it numbered hardly any undergraduates except scholars, and one scholar of my acquaintance had to himself a set of three rooms and a garden? And is "The Island" at Kennington still famous for the same excellent compound?
[H] By the way, are they still as good for flipping at New College, Oxford, as they were back when there were hardly any undergraduates besides scholars, and one scholar I knew had a whole set of three rooms and a garden to himself? And is "The Island" in Kennington still known for the same amazing compound?
[I] It came from Alford, the chef-lieu, if it cannot be called the capital, of the Tennyson country. I have pleasant associations with the place, quite independent of the beery ones. And it made me, partially at least, alter one of the ideas of my early criticism—that time spent on a poet's local habitations was rather wasted. I have always thought "The Dying Swan" one of its author's greatest things, and one of the champion examples of pure poetry in English literature. But I never fully heard the "eddying song" that "flooded"
[I] It came from Alford, the main town, if it can’t really be called the capital, of the Tennyson area. I have good memories of the place, completely separate from the drinking ones. And it made me, at least in part, rethink one of my early criticism ideas—that spending time in a poet's hometown was mostly a waste. I have always considered "The Dying Swan" one of its author's greatest works, and one of the standout examples of pure poetry in English literature. But I never fully appreciated the "eddying song" that "flooded"
the spreading moss and climbing weeds, |
And the willow branches are old and damp, |
And the gentle wave of the rustling reeds. |
And the wave-tossed horns of the resonating shore, |
And the silvery marsh flowers that gather |
The empty creeks and pools among— |
till I saw them.
until I saw them.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!