caesar and cleopatra-第20部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


understand；　and　possibly　Galen　did　not；　as　he　quotes　your
heroine's　own　language。　Foam　of　nitre　is；　I　think；　something　like
soapsuds。　Reed　bark　is　an　odd　expression。　It　might　mean　the
outside　membrane　of　a　reed：　I　do　not　know　what　it　ought　to　be
called。　In　the　burnt　mice　receipt　I　take　that　you　first　mixed　the
solid　powders　with　honey；　and　then　added　the　grease。　I　expect
Cleopatra　preferred　it　because　in　most　of　the　others　you　have　to
lacerate　the　skin；　prick　it；　or　rub　it　till　it　bleeds。　I　do　not
know　what　vine　rag　is。　I　translate　literally。〃

APPARENT　ANACHRONISMS

The　only　way　to　write　a　play　which　shall　convey　to　the　general
public　an　impression　of　antiquity　is　to　make　the　characters　speak
blank　verse　and　abstain　from　reference　to　steam；　telegraphy；　or
any　of　the　material　conditions　of　their　existence。　The　more
ignorant　men　are；　the　more　convinced　are　they　that　their　little
parish　and　their　little　chapel　is　an　apex　which　civilization　and
philosophy　have　painfully　struggled　up　the　pyramid　of　time　from　a
desert　of　savagery。　Savagery；　they　think；　became　barbarism；
barbarism　became　ancient　civilization；　ancient　civilization
became　Pauline　Christianity；　Pauline　Christianity　became　Roman
Catholicism；　Roman　Catholicism　became　the　Dark　Ages；　and　the　Dark
Ages　were　finally　enlightened　by　the　Protestant　instincts　of　the
English　race。　The　whole　process　is　summed　up　as　Progress　with　a
capital　P。　And　any　elderly　gentleman　of　Progressive　temperament
will　testify　that　the　improvement　since　he　was　a　boy　is　enormous。

Now　if　we　count　the　generations　of　Progressive　elderly　gentlemen
since；　say；　Plato；　and　add　together　the　successive　enormous
improvements　to　which　each　of　them　has　testified；　it　will　strike
us　at　once　as　an　unaccountable　fact　that　the　world；　instead　of
having　been　improved　in　67　generations　out　all　recognition；
presents；　on　the　whole；　a　rather　less　dignified　appearance　in
Ibsen's　Enemy　of　the　People　than　in　Plato's　Republic。　And　in
truth；　the　period　of　time　covered　by　history　is　far　too　short　to
allow　of　any　perceptible　progress　in　the　popular　sense　of
Evolution　of　the　Human　Species。　The　notion　that　there　has　been
any　such　Progress　since　Caesar's　time　（less　than　20　centuries）　is
too　absurd　for　discussion。　All　the　savagery；　barbarism；　dark　ages
and　the　rest　of　it　of　which　we　have　any　record　as　existing　in　the
past；　exists　at　the　present　moment。　A　British　carpenter　or
stonemason　may　point　out　that　he　gets　twice　as　much　money　for　his
labor　as　his　father　did　in　the　same　trade；　and　that　his　suburban
house；　with　its　bath；　its　cottage　piano；　its　drawingroom　suite；
and　its　album　of　photographs；　would　have　shamed　the　plainness　of
his　grandmother's。　But　the　descendants　of　feudal　barons；　living
in　squalid　lodgings　on　a　salary　of　fifteen　shillings　a　week
instead　of　in　castles　on　princely　revenues；　do　not　congratulate
the　world　on　the　change。　Such　changes；　in　fact；　are　not　to　the
point。　It　has　been　known；　as　far　back　as　our　records　go；　that　man
running　wild　in　the　woods　is　different　to　man　kennelled　in　a　city
slum；　that　a　dog　seems　to　understand　a　shepherd　better　than　a
hewer　of　wood　and　drawer　of　water　can　understand　an　astronomer；
and　that　breeding；　gentle　nurture　and　luxurious　food　and　shelter
will　produce　a　kind　of　man　with　whom　the　common　laborer　is
socially　incompatible。　The　same　thing　is　true　of　horses　and　dogs。
Now　there　is　　clearly　room　for　great　changes　in　the　world　by
increasing　the　percentage　of　individuals　who　are　carefully　bred
and　gently　nurtured　even　to　finally　making　the　most　of　every　man
and　woman　born。　But　that　possibility　existed　in　the　days　of　the
Hittites　as　much　as　it　does　to…day。　It　does　not　give　the
slightest　real　support　to　the　common　assumption　that　the
civilized　contemporaries　of　the　Hittites　were　unlike　their
civilized　descendants　to…day。

This　would　appear　the　truest　commonplace　if　it　were　not　that　the
ordinary　citizen's　ignorance　of　the　past　combines　with　his
idealization　of　the　present　to　mislead　and　flatter　him。　Our
latest　book　on　the　new　railway　across　Asia　describes　the　dulness
of　the　Siberian　farmer　and　the　vulgar　pursepride　of　the　Siberian
man　of　business　without　the　least　consciousness　that　the　sting　of
contemptuous　instances　given　might　have　been　saved　by　writing
simply　〃Farmers　and　provincial　plutocrats　in　Siberia　are　exactly
what　they　are　in　England。〃　The　latest　professor　descanting　on　the
civilization　of　the　Western　Empire　in　the　fifth　century　feels
bound　to　assume；　in　the　teeth　of　his　own　researches；　that　the
Christian　was　one　sort　of　animal　and　the　Pagan　another。　It　might
as　well　be　assumed；　as　indeed　it　generally　is　assumed　by
implication；　that　a　murder　committed　with　a　poisoned　arrow　is
different　to　a　murder　committed　with　a　Mauser　rifle。　All　such
notions　are　illusions。　Go　back　to　the　first　syllable　of　recorded
time；　and　there　you　will　find　your　Christian　and　your　Pagan；　your
yokel　and　your　poet；　helot　and　hero；　Don　Quixote　and　Sancho；
Tamino　and　Papageno；　Newton　and　bushman　unable　to　count　eleven；
all　alive　and　contemporaneous；　and　all　convinced　that　they　are
heirs　of　all　the　ages　and　the　privileged　recipients　of　THE　truth
（all　others　damnable　heresies）；　just　as　you　have　them　to…day；
flourishing　in　countries　each　of　which　is　the　bravest　and　best
that　ever　sprang　at　Heaven's　command　from　out　of　the　azure　main。

Again；　there　is　the　illusion　of　〃increased　command　over　Nature；〃
meaning　that　cotton　is　cheap　and　that　ten　miles　of　country　road
on　a　bicycle　have　replaced　four　on　foot。　But　even　if　man's
increased　command　over　Nature　included　any　increased　command　over
himself　（the　only　sort　of　command　relevant　to　his　evolution　into
a　higher　being）；　the　fact　remains　that　it　is　only　by　running　away
from　the　increased　command　over　Nature　to　country　places　where
Nature　is　still　in　primitive　command　over　Man　that　he　can　recover
from　the　effects　of　the　smoke；　the　stench；　the　foul　air；　the
overcrowding；　the　racket；　the　ugliness；　the　dirt　which　the　cheap
cotton　costs　us。　If　manufacturing　activity　means　Progress；　the
town　must　be　more　advanced　than　the　country；　and　the　field
laborers　and　village　artizans　of　to…day　must　be　much　less　changed
from　the　servants　of　Job　than　the　proletariat　of　modern　London
from　the　proletariat　of　Caesar's　Rome。　Yet　the　cockney
proletarian　is　so　inferior　to　the　village　laborer　that　it　is　only
by　steady　recruiting　from　the　country　that　London　is　kept　alive。
This　does　not　seem　as　if　the　change　since　Job's　time　were
Progress　in　the　popular　sense：　quite　the　reverse。　The　common
stock　of　discoveries　in　physics　has　accumulated　a　little：　that　is
all。

One　more　illustration。　Is　the　Englishman　prepared　to　admit　that
the　American　is　his　superior　as　a　human　being？　I　ask　this
question　because　the　scarcity　of　labor　in　America　relatively　to
the　demand　for　it　has　led　to　a　development　of　machinery　there；
and　a　consequent　〃increase　of　command　over　Nature〃　which　makes
many　of　our　English　methods　appear　almost　medieval　to　the
up…to…date　Chicagoan。　This　means　that　the　American　has　an
advantage　over　the　Englishman　of　exactly　the　same　nature　that　the
Englishman　has　over　the　contemporaries　of　Cicero。　Is　the
Englishman　prepared　to　draw　the　same　conclusion　in　both　cases？　I
think　not。　The　American；　of　course；　will　draw　it　cheerfully；　but
I　must　then　ask　him　whether；　since　a　modern　negro　has　a　greater
〃command　over　Nature〃　than　Washington　had；　we　are　also　to　accept
the　conclusion；　involved　in　his　former　one；　that　humanity　has
progressed　from　Washington　to　the　fin　de　siecle　negro。

Finally；　I　would　point　out　that　if　life　is　crowned　by　its　success
and　devotion　in　industrial　organization　and　ingenuity；　we　had
better　worship　the　ant　and　the　bee　（as　moralists　urge　us　to　do　in
our　childhood）；　and　humble　ourselves　before　the　arrogance　of　the
birds　of　Aristophanes。

My　reason　then　for　ignoring　the　popular　conception　of　Progress　in
Caesar　and　Cleopatra　is　that　there　is　no　reason　to　suppose　that
any　Progress　has　taken　place　since　their　time。　But　even　if　I
shared　the　popular　delusion；　I　do　not　see　that　I　could　have　made
any　essential　difference　in　the　play。　I　can　only　imitate　humanity
as　I　know　it。　Nobody　knows　whether　Shakespear　thought　that
ancient　Athenian　joiners；　weavers；　or　bellows　menders　were　any
different　from　Elizabethan　ones；　but　it　is　quite　certain　that　one
could　not　have　made　them　so；　unless；　indeed；　he　had　played　the
literary　man　and　made　Quince　say；　not　〃Is　all　our　company　here？〃
but　〃Bottom：　was　not　that　Socrates　that　passed　us　at　the　Piraeus
with　Glaucon　and　Polemarchus　on　his　way　to　the　house　of
Kephalus。〃　And　so　on。

CLEOPATRA

Cleopatra　was　only　sixteen　when　Caesar　went　to　Egypt；　but　in
Egypt　sixteen　is　a　riper　age　than　it　is　in　England。　The
childishness　I　have　ascribed　to　her；　as　far　as　it　is　childishness
of　character　and　not　lack　of　experience；　is　not　a　matter　of
years。　It　may　be　observed　in　our　own　climate　at　the　present　day
in　many　women　of　fifty。　It　is　a　mistake　to　suppose　that　the
difference　between　wisdom　and　folly　has　anything　to　do　with　the
difference　between　physical　age　and　physical　youth。　Some　women
are　younger　at　seventy　than　most　women　at　seventeen。

It　must　be　borne　in　mind；　too；　that　Cleopatra　was　a　queen；　and
was　therefore　not　the　typical　Greek…cultured；　educated　Eyptian
lady　of　her　time。　To　represent　her　by　any　such　type　would　be　as
absurd　as　to　represent　George　IV　by　a　type　founded　on　the
attainments　of　Sir　Isaac　Newton。　It　is　true　that　an　ordinarily
well　educated　Alexandrian　girl　of　her　time　would　no　more　have
believed　bogey　stories　about　the　Romans　than　the　daughter　of　a
modern　Oxford　professor　would　believe　them　about　the　Germans
（though；　by　the　way；　it　is　possible　to　talk　great　nonsense　at
Oxford　about　foreigners　when　we　are　at　war　with　them）。　But　I　do
not　feel　bound　to　believe　that　Cleopatra　was　well　educated。　Her
father；　the　illustrious　Flute　Blower；　was　not　at　all　a　parent　of
the　Oxford　professor　type。　And　Cleopatra　was　a　chip　of　the　old
block。

BRITANNUS

I　find　among　those　who　have　read　this　play　in　manuscript　a　strong
conviction　that　an　ancient　Briton　could　not　possibly　have　been
like　a　modern　one。　I　see　no　reas