a miscellany of men-第14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！




But　some　people　call　themselves　Socialists；　and　will　not　be　bound　by　what　they　call　a　narrow　dogma；　they　say　that　Socialism　means　far；　far　more　than　this；　all　that　is　high；　all　that　is　free；　all　that　is：　etc。；　etc。　Now　mark　their　dreadful　fate；　for　they　become　totally　unfit　to　be　tradesmen；　or　soldiers；　or　clergymen；　or　any　other　stricken　human　thing；　but　become　a　particular　sort　of　person　who　is　always　the　same。　　When　once　it　has　been　discovered　that　Socialism　does　not　mean　a　narrow　economic　formula；　it　is　also　discovered　that　Socialism　does　mean　wearing　one　particular　kind　of　clothes；　reading　one　particular　kind　of　books；　hanging　up　one　particular　kind　of　pictures；　and　in　the　majority　of　cases　even　eating　one　particular　kind　of　food。　　For　men　must　recognise　each　other　somehow。　　These　men　will　not　know　each　other　by　a　principle；　like　fellowcitizens。　　They　cannot　know　each　other　by　a　smell；　like　dogs。　　So　they　have　to　fall　back　on　general　colouring；　on　the　fact　that　a　man　of　their　sort　will　have　a　wife　in　pale　green　and　Walter　Crane's　〃Triumph　of　Labour〃　hanging　in　the　hall。

There　are；　of　course；　many　other　instances；　for　modern　society　is　almost　made　up　of　these　large　monochrome　patches。　　Thus　I；　for　one；　regret　the　supersession　of　the　old　Puritan　unity；　founded　on　theology；　but　embracing　all　types　from　Milton　to　the　grocer；　by　that　newer　Puritan　unity　which　is　founded　rather　on　certain　social　habits；　certain　common　notions；　both　permissive　and　prohibitive；　in　connection　with　Particular　social　pleasures。

Thus　I；　for　one；　regret　that　（if　you　are　going　to　have　an　aristocracy）　it　did　not　remain　a　logical　one　founded　on　the　science　of　heraldry；　a　thing　asserting　and　defending　the　quite　defensible　theory　that　physical　genealogy　is　the　test；　instead　of　being；　as　it　is　now；　a　mere　machine　of　Eton　and　Oxford　for　varnishing　anybody　rich　enough　with　one　monotonous　varnish。

And　it　is　supremely　so　in　the　case　of　religion。　　As　long　as　you　have　a　creed；　which　every　one　in　a　certain　group　believes　or　is　supposed　to　believe；　then　that　group　will　consist　of　the　old　recurring　figures　of　religious　history；　who　can　be　appealed　to　by　the　creed　and　judged　by　it；　the　saint；　the　hypocrite；　the　brawler；　the　weak　brother。　　These　people　do　each　other　good；　or　they　all　join　together　to　do　the　hypocrite　good；　with　heavy　and　repeated　blows。　　But　once　break　the　bond　of　doctrine　which　alone　holds　these　people　together　and　each　will　gravitate　to　his　own　kind　outside　the　group。　　The　hypocrites　will　all　get　together　and　call　each　other　saints；　the　saints　will　get　lost　in　a　desert　and　call　themselves　weak　brethren；　the　weak　brethren　will　get　weaker　and　weaker　in　a　general　atmosphere　of　imbecility；　and　the　brawler　will　go　off　looking　for　somebody　else　with　whom　to　brawl。

This　has　very　largely　happened　to　modern　English　religion；　I　have　been　in　many　churches；　chapels；　and　halls　where　a　confident　pride　in　having　got　beyond　creeds　was　coupled　with　quite　a　paralysed　incapacity　to　get　beyond　catchwords。　　But　wherever　the　falsity　appears　it　comes　from　neglect　of　the　same　truth：　that　men　should　agree　on　a　principle；　that　they　may　differ　on　everything　else；　that　God　gave　men　a　law　that　they　might　turn　it　into　liberties。

There　was　hugely　more　sense　in　the　old　people　who　said　that　a　wife　and　husband　ought　to　have　the　same　religion　than　there　is　in　all　the　contemporary　gushing　about　sister　souls　and　kindred　spirits　and　auras　of　identical　colour。　　As　a　matter　of　fact；　the　more　the　sexes　are　in　violent　contrast　the　less　likely　they　are　to　be　in　violent　collision。　　The　more　incompatible　their　tempers　are　the　better。　Obviously　a　wife's　soul　cannot　possibly　be　a　sister　soul。　　It　is　very　seldom　so　much　as　a　first　cousin。　There　are　very　few　marriages　of　identical　taste　and　temperament；　they　are　generally　unhappy。　　But　to　have　the　same　fundamental　theory；　to　think　the　same　thing　a　virtue；　whether　you　practise　or　neglect　it；　to　think　the　same　thing　a　sin；　whether　you　punish　or　pardon　or　laugh　at　it；　in　the　last　extremity　to　call　the　same　thing　duty　and　the　same　thing　disgrace　this　really　is　necessary　to　a　tolerably　happy　marriage；　and　it　is　much　better　represented　by　a　common　religion　than　it　is　by　affinities　and　auras。　　And　what　applies　to　the　family　applies　to　the　nation。　　A　nation　with　a　root　religion　will　be　tolerant。　　A　nation　with　no　religion　will　be　bigoted。　　Lastly；　the　worst　effect　of　all　is　this：　that　when　men　come　together　to　profess　a　creed；　they　come　courageously；　though　it　is　to　hide　in　catacombs　and　caves。　　But　when　they　come　together　in　a　clique　they　come　sneakishly；　eschewing　all　change　or　disagreement；　though　it　is　to　dine　to　a　brass　band　in　a　big　London　hotel。　　For　birds　of　a　feather　flock　together；　but　birds　of　the　white　feather　most　of　all。



THE　FOOL


For　many　years　I　had　sought　him；　and　at　last　I　found　him　in　a　club。　　I　had　been　told　that　he　was　everywhere；　but　I　had　almost　begun　to　think　that　he　was　nowhere。　　I　had　been　assured　that　there　were　millions　of　him；　but　before　my　late　discovery　I　inclined　to　think　that　there　were　none　of　him。　　After　my　late　discovery　I　am　sure　that　there　is　one；　and　I　incline　to　think　that　there　are　several；　say；　a　few　hundreds；　but　unfortunately　most　of　them　occupying　important　positions。　　When　I　say　〃him；〃　I　mean　the　entire　idiot。

I　have　never　been　able　to　discover　that　〃stupid　public〃　of　which　so　many　literary　men　complain。　The　people　one　actually　meets　in　trains　or　at　tea…　parties　seem　to　me　quite　bright　and　interesting；　certainly　quite　enough　so　to　call　for　the　full　exertion　of　one's　own　wits。　　And　even　when　I　have　heard　brilliant　〃conversationalists〃　conversing　with　other　people；　the　conversation　had　much　more　equality　and　give　and　take　than　this　age　of　intellectual　snobs　will　admit。　　I　have　sometimes　felt　tired；　like　other　people；　but　rather　tired　with　men's　talk　and　variety　than　with　their　stolidity　or　sameness；　therefore　it　was　that　I　sometimes　longed　to　find　the　refreshment　of　a　single　fool。

But　it　was　denied　me。　　Turn　where　I　would　I　found　this　monotonous　brilliancy　of　the　general　intelligence；　this　ruthless；　ceaseless　sparkle　of　humour　and　good　sense。　　The　〃mostly　fools〃　theory　has　been　used　in　an　anti…democratic　sense；　but　when　I　found　at　last　my　priceless　ass；　I　did　not　find　him　in　what　is　commonly　called　the　democracy；　nor　in　the　aristocracy　either。　　The　man　of　the　democracy　generally　talks　quite　rationally；　sometimes　on　the　anti…democratic　side；　but　always　with　an　idea　of　giving　reasons　for　what　he　says　and　referring　to　the　realities　of　his　experience。　　Nor　is　it　the　aristocracy　that　is　stupid；　at　least；　not　that　section　of　the　aristocracy　which　represents　it　in　politics。　　They　are　often　cynical；　especially　about　money；　but　even　their　boredom　tends　to　make　them　a　little　eager　for　any　real　information　or　originality。　　If　a　man　like　Mr。　Winston　Churchill　or　Mr。　Wyndham　made　up　his　mind　for　any　reason　to　attack　Syndicalism　he　would　find　out　what　it　was　first。　Not　so　the　man　I　found　in　the　club。

He　was　very　well　dressed；　he　had　a　heavy　but　handsome　face；　his　black　clothes　suggested　the　City　and　his　gray　moustaches　the　Army；　but　the　whole　suggested　that　he　did　not　really　belong　to　either；　but　was　one　of　those　who　dabble　in　shares　and　who　play　at　soldiers。　　There　was　some　third　element　about　him　that　was　neither　mercantile　nor　military。　　His　manners　were　a　shade　too　gentlemanly　to　be　quite　those　of　a　gentleman。　They　involved　an　unction　and　over…emphasis　of　the　club…man：　then　I　suddenly　remembered　feeling　the　same　thing　in　some　old　actors　or　old　playgoers　who　had　modelled　themselves　on　actors。　　As　I　came　in　he　said；　〃If　I　was　the　Government；〃　and　then　put　a　cigar　in　his　mouth　which　he　lit　carefully　with　long　intakes　of　breath。　　Then　he　took　the　cigar　out　of　his　mouth　again　and　said；　〃I'd　give　it　'em；〃　as　if　it　were　quite　a　separate　sentence。　　But　even　while　his　mouth　was　stopped　with　the　cigar　his　companion　or　interlocutor　leaped　to　his　feet　and　said　with　great　heartiness；　snatching　up　a　hat；　〃Well；　I　must　be　off。　　Tuesday！〃。　　I　dislike　these　dark　suspicions；　but　I　certainly　fancied　I　recognised　the　sudden　geniality　with　which　one　takes　leave　of　a　bore。

When；　therefore；　he　removed　the　narcotic　stopper　from　his　mouth　it　was　to　me　that　he　addressed　the　belated　epigram。　　〃I'd　give　it　'em。〃

〃What　would　you　give　them；〃　I　asked；　〃the　minimum　wage？〃

〃I'd　give　them　beans；〃　he　said。　　〃I'd　shoot　'em　down　shoot　'em　down；　every　man　Jack　of　them。　　I　lost　my　best　train　yesterday；　and　here's　the　whole　country　paralysed；　and　here's　a　handful　of　obstinate　fellows　standing　between　the　country　and　coal。　　I'd　shoot　'em　down！〃

〃　That　would　surely　be　a　little　harsh；〃　I　pleaded。　　〃After　all；　they　are　not　under　martial　law；　though　I　suppose　two　or　three　of　them　have　commissions　in　the　Yeomanry。〃

〃Commissions　in　the　Yeomanry！〃　　he　repeated；　and　his　eyes　and　face；　which　became　startling　and　separate；　like　those　of　a　boiled　lobster；　made　me　feel　sure　that　he　had　something　of　the　kind　himself。

〃Besides；〃　I　continued；　〃wouldn't　it　be　quite　enough　to　confiscate　their　money？〃

〃Well；　I'd　send　them　all　to　penal　servitude；　anyhow；〃　he　said；　〃and　I'd　confiscate　their　funds　as　well。〃

〃The　policy　is　daring　and　full　of　difficulty；〃　I　replied；　〃but　I　do　not　say　that　it　is　wholly　outside　the　extreme　rights　of　the　republic。　　But　you　must　remember　that　though　the　facts　of　property　have　become　quite　fantastic；　yet　the　sentiment　of　property　still　exists。　　These　coal…owners；　though　they　have　not　earned　the　mines；　though　they　could　not　work　the　mines；　do　quite　honestly　feel　that　they　own　the　mines。　　Hence　your　suggestion　of　shooting　them　down；　or　even　of　confiscating　their　property；　raises　very〃

〃What　do　you　mean？〃　　asked　the　man　with　the　cigar；　with　a　bullying　eye。　〃Who　yer　talking　about？〃

〃I'm　talking　about　what　you　were　talking　about；〃　I　replied；　〃as　you　put　it　so　perfectly；　about　the　handful　of　obstinate　fellows　who　are　standing　between　the　country　and　the　coal。　　I　mean　the　men　who　are　selling　their　own　coal　for　fancy　prices；　and　who；　as　long　as　they　can　get　those　prices；　care　as　little　for　national　starvation　as　most　merchant　princes　and　pirates　have　eared　for　the　provinces　that　were　wasted　or　the　peoples　that　we