a miscellany of men-第4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！


anic；　American　or　Prussian。　　If　there　ought　to　be　female　suffrage；　let　it　be　female；　and　not　a　mere　imitation　as　coarse　as　the　male　blackguard　or　as　dull　as　the　male　clerk。　　If　there　is　to　be　Socialism；　let　it　be　social；　that　is；　as　different　as　possible　from　all　the　big　commercial　departments　of　to…day。　　The　really　good　journeyman　tailor　does　not　cut　his　coat　according　to　his　cloth；　he　asks　for　more　cloth。　　The　really　practical　statesman　does　not　fit　himself　to　existing　conditions；　he　denounces　the　conditions　as　unfit。　History　is　like　some　deeply　planted　tree　which；　though　gigantic　in　girth；　tapers　away　at　last　into　tiny　twigs；　and　we　are　in　the　topmost　branches。　　Each　of　us　is　trying　to　bend　the　tree　by　a　twig：　to　alter　England　through　a　distant　colony；　or　to　capture　the　State　through　a　small　State　department；　or　to　destroy　all　voting　through　a　vote。　　In　all　such　bewilderment　he　is　wise　who　resists　this　temptation　of　trivial　triumph　or　surrender；　and　happy　（in　an　echo　of　the　Roman　poet）　who　remembers　the　roots　of　things。



THE　NAMELESS　MAN


There　are　only　two　forms　of　government　the　monarchy　or　personal　government；　and　the　republic　or　impersonal　government。　　England　is　not　a　government；　England　is　an　anarchy；　because　there　are　so　many　kings。　　But　there　is　one　real　advantage　（among　many　real　disadvantages）　in　the　method　of　abstract　democracy；　and　that　is　this：　that　under　impersonal　government　politics　are　so　much　more　personal。　　In　France　and　America；　where　the　State　is　an　abstraction；　political　argument　is　quite　full　of　human　detailssome　might　even　say　of　inhuman　details。　　But　in　England；　precisely　because　we　are　ruled　by　personages；　these　personages　do　not　permit　personalities。　　In　England　names　are　honoured；　and　therefore　names　are　suppressed。　　But　in　the　republics；　in　France　especially；　a　man　can　put　his　enemies'　names　into　his　article　and　his　own　name　at　the　end　of　it。


This　is　the　essential　condition　of　such　candour。　　If　we　merely　made　our　anonymous　articles　more　violent；　we　should　be　baser　than　we　are　now。　　We　should　only　be　arming　masked　men　with　daggers　instead　of　cudgels。　　And　I；　for　one；　have　always　believed　in　the　more　general　signing　of　articles；　and　have　signed　my　own　articles　on　many　occasions　when；　heaven　knows；　I　had　little　reason　to　be　vain　of　them。　I　have　heard　many　arguments　for　anonymity；　but　they　all　seem　to　amount　to　the　statement　that　anonymity　is　safe；　which　is　just　what　I　complain　of。　　In　matters　of　truth　the　fact　that　you　don't　want　to　publish　something　is；　nine　times　out　of　ten；　a　proof　that　you　ought　to　publish　it。

But　there　is　one　answer　to　my　perpetual　plea　for　a　man　putting　his　name　to　his　writing。　　There　is　one　answer；　and　there　is　only　one　answer；　and　it　is　never　given。　　It　is　that　in　the　modern　complexity　very　often　a　man's　name　is　almost　as　false　as　his　pseudonym。　　The　prominent　person　to…　day　is　eternally　trying　to　lose　a　name；　and　to　get　a　title。　　For　instance；　we　all　read　with　earnestness　and　patience　the　pages　of　the　'Daily　Mail'；　and　there　are　times　when　we　feel　moved　to　cry；　〃Bring　to　us　the　man　who　thought　these　strange　thoughts！　　Pursue　him；　capture　him；　take　great　care　of　him。　　Bring　him　back　to　us　tenderly；　like　some　precious　bale　of　silk；　that　we　may　look　upon　the　face　of　the　man　who　desires　such　things　to　be　printed。　　Let　us　know　his　name；　his　social　and　medical　pedigree。〃　　But　in　the　modern　muddle　（it　might　be　said）　how　little　should　we　gain　if　those　frankly　fatuous　sheets　were　indeed　subscribed　by　the　man　who　had　inspired　them。　　Suppose　that　after　every　article　stating　that　the　Premier　is　a　piratical　Socialist　there　were　printed　the　simple　word　〃Northcliffe。〃　What　does　that　simple　word　suggest　to　the　simple　soul？　　To　my　simple　soul　（uninstructed　otherwise）　it　suggests　a　lofty　and　lonely　crag　somewhere　in　the　wintry　seas　towards　the　Orkheys　or　Norway；　and　barely　clinging　to　the　top　of　this　crag　the　fortress　of　some　forgotten　chieftain。　　As　it　happens；　of　course；　I　know　that　the　word　does　not　mean　this；　it　means　another　Fleet　Street　journalist　like　myself　or　only　different　from　myself　in　so　far　as　he　has　sought　to　secure　money　while　I　have　sought　to　secure　a　jolly　time。

A　title　does　not　now　even　serve　as　a　distinction：　it　does　not　distinguish。　A　coronet　is　not　merely　an　extinguisher：　it　is　a　hiding…place。

But　the　really　odd　thing　is　this。　　This　false　quality　in　titles　does　not　merely　apply　to　the　new　and　vulgar　titles；　but　to　the　old　and　historic　titles　also。　　For　hundreds　of　years　titles　in　England　have　been　essentially　unmeaning；　void　of　that　very　weak　and　very　human　instinct　in　which　titles　originated。　　In　essential　nonsense　of　application　there　is　nothing　to　choose　between　Northcliffe　and　Norfolk。　　The　Duke　of　Norfolk　means　（as　my　exquisite　and　laborious　knowledge　of　Latin　informs　me）　the　Leader　of　Norfolk。　　It　is　idle　to　talk　against　representative　government　or　for　it。　　All　government　is　representative　government　until　it　begins　to　decay。　　Unfortunately　（as　is　also　evident）　all　government　begins　to　decay　the　instant　it　begins　to　govern。　　All　aristocrats　were　first　meant　as　envoys　of　democracy；　and　most　envoys　of　democracy　lose　no　time　in　becoming　aristocrats。　　By　the　old　essential　human　notion；　the　Duke　of　Norfolk　ought　simply　to　be　the　first　or　most　manifest　of　Norfolk　men。

I　see　growing　and　filling　out　before　me　the　image　of　an　actual　Duke　of　Norfolk。　　For　instance；　Norfolk　men　all　make　their　voices　run　up　very　high　at　the　end　of　a　sentence。　　The　Duke　of　Norfolk's　voice；　therefore；　ought　to　end　in　a　perfect　shriek。　　They　often　（I　am　told）　end　sentences　with　the　word　〃together〃；　entirely　irrespective　of　its　meaning。　　Thus　I　shall　expect　the　Duke　of　Norfolk　to　say：　〃I　beg　to　second　the　motion　together〃；　or　〃This　is　a　great　constitutional　question　together。〃　　I　shall　expect　him　to　know　much　about　the　Broads　and　the　sluggish　rivers　above　them；　to　know　about　the　shooting　of　water…fowl；　and　not　to　know　too　much　about　anything　else。　　Of　mountains　he　must　be　wildly　and　ludicrously　ignorant。　　He　must　have　the　freshness　of　Norfolk；　nay；　even　the　flatness　of　Norfolk。　　He　must　remind　me　of　the　watery　expanses；　the　great　square　church　towers　and　the　long　level　sunsets　of　East　England。　　If　he　does　not　do　this；　I　decline　to　know　him。

I　need　not　multiply　such　cases；　the　principle　applies　everywhere。　　Thus　I　lose　all　interest　in　the　Duke　of　Devonshire　unless　he　can　assure　me　that　his　soul　is　filled　with　that　strange　warm　Puritanism；　Puritanism　shot　with　romance；　which　colours　the　West　Country。　　He　must　eat　nothing　but　clotted　cream；　drink　nothing　but　cider；　reading　nothing　but　'Lorna　Doone'；　and　be　unacquainted　with　any　town　larger　than　Plymouth；　which　he　must　regard　with　some　awe；　as　the　Central　Babylon　of　the　world。　　Again；　I　should　expect　the　Prince　of　Wales　always　to　be　full　of　the　mysticism　and　dreamy　ardour　of　the　Celtic　fringe。

Perhaps　it　may　be　thought　that　these　demands　are　a　little　extreme；　and　that　our　fancy　is　running　away　with　us。　　Nevertheless；　it　is　not　my　Duke　of　Devonshire　who　is　funny；　but　the　real　Duke　of　Devonshire。　　The　point　is　that　the　scheme　of　titles　is　a　misfit　throughout：　hardly　anywhere　do　we　find　a　modern　man　whose　name　and　rank　represent　in　any　way　his　type；　his　locality；　or　his　mode　of　life。　　As　a　mere　matter　of　social　comedy；　the　thing　is　worth　noticing。　　You　will　meet　a　man　whose　name　suggests　a　gouty　admiral；　and　you　will　find　him　exactly　like　a　timid　organist：　you　will　hear　announced　the　name　of　a　haughty　and　almost　heathen　grande　dame；　and　behold　the　entrance　of　a　nice；　smiling　Christian　cook。　　These　are　light　complications　of　the　central　fact　of　the　falsification　of　all　names　and　ranks。　　Our　peers　are　like　a　party　of　mediaeval　knights　who　should　have　exchanged　shields；　crests；　and　pennons。　　For　the　present　rule　seems　to　be　that　the　Duke　of　Sussex　may　lawfully　own　the　whole　of　Essex；　and　that　the　Marquis　of　Cornwall　may　own　all　the　hills　and　valleys　so　long　as　they　are　not　Cornish。

The　clue　to　all　this　tangle　is　as　simple　as　it　is　terrible。　　If　England　is　an　aristocracy；　England　is　dying。　　If　this　system　IS　the　country；　as　some　say；　the　country　is　stiffening　into　more　than　the　pomp　and　paralysis　of　China。　　It　is　the　final　sign　of　imbecility　in　a　people　that　it　calls　cats　dogs　and　describes　the　sun　as　the　moonand　is　very　particular　about　the　preciseness　of　these　pseudonyms。　To　be　wrong；　and　to　be　carefully　wrong；　that　is　the　definition　of　decadence。　　The　disease　called　aphasia；　in　which　people　begin　by　saying　tea　when　they　mean　coffee；　commonly　ends　in　their　silence。　　Silence　of　this　stiff　sort　is　the　chief　mark　of　the　powerful　parts　of　modern　society。　　They　all　seem　straining　to　keep　things　in　rather　than　to　let　things　out。　　For　the　kings　of　finance　speechlessness　is　counted　a　way　of　being　strong；　though　it　should　rather　be　counted　a　way　of　being　sly。　　By　this　time　the　Parliament　does　not　parley　any　more　than　the　Speaker　speaks。　　Even　the　newspaper　editors　and　proprietors　are　more　despotic　and　dangerous　by　what　they　do　not　utter　than　by　what　they　do。　　We　have　all　heard　the　expression　〃golden　silence。〃　The　expression　〃brazen　silence〃　is　the　only　adequate　phrase　for　our　editors。　　If　we　wake　out　of　this　throttled；　gaping；　and　wordless　nightmare；　we　must　awake　with　a　yell。　　The　Revolution　that　releases　England　from　the　fixed　falsity　of　its　present　position　will　be　not　less　noisy　than　other　revolutions。　　It　will　contain；　I　fear；　a　great　deal　of　that　rude　accomplishment　described　among　little　boys　as　〃calling　names〃；　but　that　will　not　matter　much　so　long　as　they　are　the　right　names。



THE　GARDENER　AND　THE　GUINEA


Strictly　speaking；　there　is　no　such　thing　as　an　English　Peasant。　　Indeed；　the　type　can　only　exist　in　community；　so　much　does　it　depend　on　co…　operation　and　common　laws。　　One　must　not　think　primarily　of　a　French　Peasant；　any　more　than　of　a　German　Measle。　　The　plural　of　the　word　is　its　proper　form；　you　cannot　have　a　Peasant　till　you　have　a　peasantry。　　The　essence　of　the　Peasant　ideal　is　equality；　and　you　cannot　be　equal　all　by　yourself。

Nevertheless；　because　human　nature　always　craves　and　half　creates　the　things　necessary　to　its　happiness；　there　are　approximations　and　suggestions　of　the　possibility　of　such　a　race　even　her