1
I find it very difficult to trace
how form was added to form and interpretation followed
interpretation in my ever-spreading, ever-deepening,
ever-multiplying and enriching vision of this world
into which I had been born. Every day added its
impressions, its hints, its subtle explications
to the growing understanding. Day after day the
living interlacing threads of a mind weave together.
Every morning now for three weeks and more (for to-day
is Thursday and I started on a Tuesday) I have been
trying to convey some idea of the factors and early
influences by which my particular scrap of subjective
tapestry was shaped, to show the child playing on
the nursery floor, the son perplexed by his mother,
gazing aghast at his dead father, exploring interminable
suburbs, touched by first intimations of the sexual
mystery, coming in with a sort of confused avidity
towards the centres of the life of London. It
is only by such an effort to write it down that one
realises how marvellously crowded, how marvellously
analytical and synthetic those ears must be.
One begins with the little child to whom the sky is
a roof of blue, the world a screen of opaque and disconnected
facts, the home a thing eternal, and “being good”
just simple obedience to unquestioned authority; and
one comes at last to the vast world of one’s
adult perception, pierced deep by flaring searchlights
of partial understanding, here masked by mists, here
refracted and distorted through half translucent veils,
here showing broad prospects and limitless vistas
and here impenetrably dark.
I recall phases of deep speculation,
doubts and even prayers by night, and strange occasions
when by a sort of hypnotic contemplation of nothingness
I sought to pierce the web of appearances about me.
It is hard to measure these things in receding perspective,
and now I cannot trace, so closely has mood succeeded
and overlaid and obliterated mood, the phases by which
an utter horror of death was replaced by the growing
realisation of its necessity and dignity. Difficulty
of the imagination with infinite space, infinite time,
entangled my mind; and moral distress for the pain
and suffering of bygone ages that made all thought
of reformation in the future seem but the grimmest
irony upon now irreparable wrongs. Many an intricate
perplexity of these broadening years did not so much
get settled as cease to matter. Life crowded me
away from it.
I have confessed myself a temerarious
theologian, and in that passage from boyhood to manhood
I ranged widely in my search for some permanently
satisfying Truth. That, too, ceased after a time
to be urgently interesting. I came at last into
a phase that endures to this day, of absolute tranquillity,
of absolute confidence in whatever that Incomprehensible
Comprehensive which must needs be the substratum of
all things, may be. Feeling of it,
feeling by it, I cannot feel afraid of it.
I think I had got quite clearly and finally to that
adjustment long before my Cambridge days were done.
I am sure that the evil in life is transitory and
finite like an accident or distress in the nursery;
that God is my Father and that I may trust Him, even
though life hurts so that one must needs cry out at
it, even though it shows no consequence but failure,
no promise but pain....
But while I was fearless of theology
I must confess it was comparatively late before I
faced and dared to probe the secrecies of sex.
I was afraid of sex. I had an instinctive perception
that it would be a large and difficult thing in my
life, but my early training was all in the direction
of regarding it as an irrelevant thing, as something
disconnected from all the broad significances of life,
as hostile and disgraceful in its quality. The
world was never so emasculated in thought, I suppose,
as it was in the Victorian time....
I was afraid to think either of sex
or (what I have always found inseparable from a kind
of sexual emotion) beauty. Even as a boy I knew
the thing as a haunting and alluring mystery that I
tried to keep away from. Its dim presence obsessed
me none the less for all the extravagant decency,
the stimulating silences of my upbringing....
The plaster Venuses and Apollos
that used to adorn the vast aisle and huge grey terraces
of the Crystal Palace were the first intimations of
the beauty of the body that ever came into my life.
As I write of it I feel again the shameful attraction
of those gracious forms. I used to look at them
not simply, but curiously and askance. Once at
least in my later days at Penge, I spent a shilling
in admission chiefly for the sake of them....
The strangest thing of all my odd
and solitary upbringing seems to me now that swathing
up of all the splendours of the flesh, that strange
combination of fanatical terrorism and shyness that
fenced me about with prohibitions. It caused
me to grow up, I will not say blankly ignorant, but
with an ignorance blurred and dishonoured by shame,
by enigmatical warnings, by cultivated aversions,
an ignorance in which a fascinated curiosity and desire
struggled like a thing in a net. I knew so little
and I felt so much. There was indeed no Aphrodite
at all in my youthful Pantheon, but instead there
was a mysterious and minatory gap. I have told
how at last a new Venus was born in my imagination
out of gas lamps and the twilight, a Venus with a
cockney accent and dark eyes shining out of the dusk,
a Venus who was a warm, passion-stirring atmosphere
rather than incarnate in a body. And I have told,
too, how I bought a picture.
All this was a thing apart from the
rest of my life, a locked avoided chamber....
It was not until my last year at Trinity
that I really broke down the barriers of this unwholesome
silence and brought my secret broodings to the light
of day. Then a little set of us plunged suddenly
into what we called at first sociological discussion.
I can still recall even the physical feeling of those
first tentative talks. I remember them mostly
as occurring in the rooms of Ted Hatherleigh, who kept
at the corner by the Trinity great gate, but we also
used to talk a good deal at a man’s in King’s,
a man named, if I remember rightly, Redmayne.
The atmosphere of Hatherleigh’s rooms was a
haze of tobacco smoke against a background brown and
deep. He professed himself a socialist with anarchistic
leanings-he had suffered the martyrdom of
ducking for it-and a huge French May-day
poster displaying a splendid proletarian in red and
black on a barricade against a flaring orange sky,
dominated his decorations. Hatherleigh affected
a fine untidiness, and all the place, even the floor,
was littered with books, for the most part open and
face downward; deeper darknesses were supplied by
a discarded gown and our caps, all conscientiously
battered, Hatherleigh’s flopped like an elephant’s
ear and inserted quill pens supported the corners of
mine; the highlights of the picture came chiefly as
reflections from his chequered blue mugs full of audit
ale. We sat on oak chairs, except the four or
five who crowded on a capacious settle, we drank a
lot of beer and were often fuddled, and occasionally
quite drunk, and we all smoked reckless-looking pipes,-there
was a transient fashion among us for corn cobs for
which Mark Twain, I think, was responsible. Our
little excesses with liquor were due far more to conscience
than appetite, indicated chiefly a resolve to break
away from restraints that we suspected were keeping
us off the instructive knife-edges of life. Hatherleigh
was a good Englishman of the premature type with a
red face, a lot of hair, a deep voice and an explosive
plunging manner, and it was he who said one evening-Heaven
knows how we got to it-“Look here,
you know, it’s all Rot, this Shutting Up about
Women. We ought to talk about them.
What are we going to do about them? It’s
got to come. We’re all festering inside
about it. Let’s out with it. There’s
too much Decency altogether about this Infernal University!”
We rose to his challenge a little
awkwardly and our first talk was clumsy, there were
flushed faces and red ears, and I remember Hatherleigh
broke out into a monologue on decency. “Modesty
and Decency,” said Hatherleigh, “are Oriental
vices. The Jews brought them to Europe.
They’re Semitic, just like our monasticism here
and the seclusion of women and mutilating the dead
on a battlefield. And all that sort of thing.”
Hatherleigh’s mind progressed
by huge leaps, leaps that were usually wildly inaccurate,
and for a time we engaged hotly upon the topic of
those alleged mutilations and the Semitic responsibility
for decency. Hatherleigh tried hard to saddle
the Semitic race with the less elegant war customs
of the Soudan and the northwest frontier of India,
and quoted Doughty, at that time a little-known author,
and Cunninghame Graham to show that the Arab was worse
than a county-town spinster in his regard for respectability.
But his case was too preposterous, and Esmeer, with
his shrill penetrating voice and his way of pointing
with all four long fingers flat together, carried
the point against him. He quoted Cato and Roman
law and the monasteries of Thibet.
“Well, anyway,” said Hatherleigh,
escaping from our hands like an intellectual frog,
“Semitic or not, I’ve got no use for decency.”
We argued points and Hatherleigh professed
an unusually balanced and tolerating attitude.
“I don’t mind a certain refinement and
dignity,” he admitted generously. “What
I object to is this spreading out of decency until
it darkens the whole sky, until it makes a man’s
father afraid to speak of the most important things,
until it makes a man afraid to look a frank book in
the face or think-even think! until it leads
to our coming to-to the business at last
with nothing but a few prohibitions, a few hints,
a lot of dirty jokes and, and “-he
waved a hand and seemed to seek and catch his image
in the air-“oh, a confounded buttered
slide of sentiment, to guide us. I tell you I’m
going to think about it and talk about it until I
see a little more daylight than I do at present.
I’m twenty-two. Things might happen to me
anywhen. You men can go out into the world if
you like, to sin like fools and marry like fools,
not knowing what you are doing and ashamed to ask.
You’ll take the consequences, too, I expect,
pretty meekly, sniggering a bit, sentimentalising
a bit, like-like Cambridge humorists....
I mean to know what I’m doing.”
He paused to drink, and I think I
cut in with ideas of my own. But one is apt to
forget one’s own share in a talk, I find, more
than one does the clear-cut objectivity of other people’s,
and I do not know how far I contributed to this discussion
that followed. I am, however, pretty certain
that it was then that ideal that we were pleased to
call aristocracy and which soon became the common
property of our set was developed. It was Esmeer,
I know, who laid down and maintained the proposition
that so far as minds went there were really only two
sorts of man in the world, the aristocrat and the
man who subdues his mind to other people’s.
“‘I couldn’t think
of it, Sir,’” said Esmeer in his elucidatory
tones; “that’s what a servant says.
His mind even is broken in to run between fences,
and he admits it. We’ve got to be able
to think of anything. And ‘such things
aren’t for the Likes of Us!’ That’s
another servant’s saying. Well, everything
is for the Likes of Us. If we see fit, that
is.”
A small fresh-coloured man in grey objected.
“Well,” exploded Hatherleigh,
“if that isn’t so what the deuce are we
up here for? Instead of working in mines?
If some things aren’t to be thought about ever!
We’ve got the privilege of all these extra years
for getting things straight in our heads, and then
we won’t use ’em. Good God! what
do you think a university’s for?"...
Esmeer’s idea came with an effect
of real emancipation to several of us. We were
not going to be afraid of ideas any longer, we were
going to throw down every barrier of prohibition and
take them in and see what came of it. We became
for a time even intemperately experimental, and one
of us, at the bare suggestion of an eminent psychic
investigator, took hashish and very nearly died of
it within a fortnight of our great elucidation.
The chief matter of our interchanges
was of course the discussion of sex. Once the
theme had been opened it became a sore place in our
intercourse; none of us seemed able to keep away from
it. Our imaginations got astir with it.
We made up for lost time and went round it and through
it and over it exhaustively. I recall prolonged
discussion of polygamy on the way to Royston, muddy
November tramps to Madingley, when amidst much profanity
from Hatherleigh at the serious treatment of so obsolete
a matter, we weighed the reasons, if any, for the
institution of marriage. The fine dim night-time
spaces of the Great Court are bound up with the inconclusive
finales of mighty hot-eared wrangles; the narrows
of Trinity Street and Petty Cury and Market Hill have
their particular associations for me with that spate
of confession and free speech, that almost painful
goal delivery of long pent and crappled and sometimes
crippled ideas.
And we went on a reading party that
Easter to a place called Pulborough in Sussex, where
there is a fishing inn and a river that goes under
a bridge. It was a late Easter and a blazing
one, and we boated and bathed and talked of being
Hellenic and the beauty of the body until at moments
it seemed to us that we were destined to restore the
Golden Age, by the simple abolition of tailors and
outfitters.
Those undergraduate talks! how rich
and glorious they seemed, how splendidly new the ideas
that grew and multiplied in our seething minds!
We made long afternoon and evening raids over the Downs
towards Arundel, and would come tramping back through
the still keen moonlight singing and shouting.
We formed romantic friendships with one another, and
grieved more or less convincingly that there were no
splendid women fit to be our companions in the world.
But Hatherleigh, it seemed, had once known a girl
whose hair was gloriously red. “My God!”
said Hatherleigh to convey the quality of her; just
simply and with projectile violence: “My
God!”
Benton had heard of a woman who lived
with a man refusing to be married to him-we
thought that splendid beyond measure,-I
cannot now imagine why. She was “like a
tender goddess,” Benton said. A sort of
shame came upon us in the dark in spite of our liberal
intentions when Benton committed himself to that.
And after such talk we would fall upon great pauses
of emotional dreaming, and if by chance we passed a
girl in a governess cart, or some farmer’s daughter
walking to the station, we became alertly silent or
obstreperously indifferent to her. For might
she not be just that one exception to the banal decency,
the sickly pointless conventionality, the sham modesty
of the times in which we lived?
We felt we stood for a new movement,
not realising how perennially this same emancipation
returns to those ancient courts beside the Cam.
We were the anti-decency party, we discovered a catch
phrase that we flourished about in the Union and made
our watchword, namely, “stark fact.”
We hung nude pictures in our rooms much as if they
had been flags, to the earnest concern of our bedders,
and I disinterred my long-kept engraving and had it
framed in fumed oak, and found for it a completer
and less restrained companion, a companion I never
cared for in the slightest degree....
This efflorescence did not prevent,
I think indeed it rather helped, our more formal university
work, for most of us took firsts, and three of us
got Fellowships in one year or another. There
was Benton who had a Research Fellowship and went
to Tübingen, there was Esmeer and myself who
both became Residential Fellows. I had taken the
Mental and Moral Science Tripos (as it was then),
and three years later I got a lectureship in political
science. In those days it was disguised in the
cloak of Political Economy.
2
It was our affectation to be a little
detached from the main stream of undergraduate life.
We worked pretty hard, but by virtue of our beer,
our socialism and suchlike heterodoxy, held ourselves
to be differentiated from the swatting reading man.
None of us, except Baxter, who was a rowing blue,
a rather abnormal blue with an appetite for ideas,
took games seriously enough to train, and on the other
hand we intimated contempt for the rather mediocre,
deliberately humorous, consciously gentlemanly and
consciously wild undergraduate men who made up the
mass of Cambridge life. After the manner of youth
we were altogether too hard on our contemporaries.
We battered our caps and tore our gowns lest they
should seem new, and we despised these others extremely
for doing exactly the same things; we had an idea of
ourselves and resented beyond measure a similar weakness
in these our brothers.
There was a type, or at least there
seemed to us to be a type-I’m a little
doubtful at times now whether after all we didn’t
create it-for which Hatherleigh invented
the nickname the “Pinky Dinkys,” intending
thereby both contempt and abhorrence in almost equal
measure. The Pinky Dinky summarised all that
we particularly did not want to be, and also, I now
perceive, much of what we were and all that we secretly
dreaded becoming.
But it is hard to convey the Pinky
Dinky idea, for all that it meant so much to us.
We spent one evening at least during that reading party
upon the Pinky Dinky; we sat about our one fire after
a walk in the rain-it was our only wet
day-smoked our excessively virile pipes,
and elaborated the natural history of the Pinky Dinky.
We improvised a sort of Pinky Dinky litany, and Hatherleigh
supplied deep notes for the responses.
“The Pinky Dinky extracts a
good deal of amusement from life,” said some
one.
“Damned prig!” said Hatherleigh.
“The Pinky Dinky arises in the
Union and treats the question with a light gay touch.
He makes the weird ones mad. But sometimes he
cannot go on because of the amusement he extracts.”
“I want to shy books at the
giggling swine,” said Hatherleigh.
“The Pinky Dinky says suddenly
while he is making the tea, ’We’re all
being frightfully funny. It’s time for you
to say something now.’”
“The Pinky Dinky shakes his
head and says: ’I’m afraid I shall
never be a responsible being.’ And he really
is frivolous.”
“Frivolous but not vulgar,” said Esmeer.
“Pinky Dinkys are chaps who’ve
had their buds nipped,” said Hatherleigh.
“They’re Plebs and they know it. They
haven’t the Guts to get hold of things.
And so they worry up all those silly little jokes of
theirs to carry it off."...
We tried bad ones for a time, viciously flavoured.
Pinky Dinkys are due to over-production
of the type that ought to keep outfitters’ shops.
Pinky Dinkys would like to keep outfitters’ shops
with whimsy ’scriptions on the boxes and make
your bill out funny, and not be snobs to customers,
no!-not even if they had titles.”
“Every Pinky Dinky’s people
are rather good people, and better than most Pinky
Dinky’s people. But he does not put on side.”
“Pinky Dinkys become playful at the sight of
women.”
“‘Croquet’s my game,’
said the Pinky Dinky, and felt a man condescended.”
“But what the devil do they
think they’re up to, anyhow?” roared old
Hatherleigh suddenly, dropping plump into bottomless
despair.
We felt we had still failed to get
at the core of the mystery of the Pinky Dinky.
We tried over things about his religion.
“The Pinky Dinky goes to King’s Chapel,
and sits and feels in the dusk. Solemn things!
Oh hush! He wouldn’t tell you-”
“He couldn’t tell you.”
“Religion is so sacred to him
he never talks about it, never reads about it, never
thinks about it. Just feels!”
“But in his heart of hearts,
oh! ever so deep, the Pinky Dinky has a doubt-”
Some one protested.
“Not a vulgar doubt,”
Esmeer went on, “but a kind of hesitation whether
the Ancient of Days is really exactly what one would
call good form.... There’s a lot of horrid
coarseness got into the world somehow. Somebody
put it there.... And anyhow there’s no particular
reason why a man should be seen about with Him.
He’s jolly Awful of course and all that-”
“The Pinky Dinky for all his
fun and levity has a clean mind.”
“A thoroughly clean mind. Not like Esmeer’s-the
Pig!”
“If once he began to think about
sex, how could he be comfortable at croquet?”
“It’s their Damned Modesty,”
said Hatherleigh suddenly, “that’s what’s
the matter with the Pinky Dinky. It’s Mental
Cowardice dressed up as a virtue and taking the poor
dears in. Cambridge is soaked with it; it’s
some confounded local bacillus. Like the thing
that gives a flavour to Havana cigars. He comes
up here to be made into a man and a ruler of the people,
and he thinks it shows a nice disposition not to take
on the job! How the Devil is a great Empire to
be run with men like him?”
“All his little jokes and things,”
said Esmeer regarding his feet on the fender, “it’s
just a nervous sniggering-because he’s
afraid.... Oxford’s no better.”
“What’s he afraid of?” said I.
“God knows!” exploded Hatherleigh and
stared at the fire.
“Life!” said Esmeer.
“And so in a way are we,” he added, and
made a thoughtful silence for a time.
“I say,” began Carter,
who was doing the Natural Science Tripos, “what
is the adult form of the Pinky Dinky?”
But there we were checked by our ignorance of the
world.
“What is the adult form of any
of us?” asked Benton, voicing the thought that
had arrested our flow.
3
I do not remember that we ever lifted
our criticism to the dons and the organisation of
the University. I think we took them for granted.
When I look back at my youth I am always astonished
by the multitude of things that we took for granted.
It seemed to us that Cambridge was in the order of
things, for all the world like having eyebrows or a
vermiform appendix. Now with the larger scepticism
of middle age I can entertain very fundamental doubts
about these old universities. Indeed I had a
scheme-
I do not see what harm I can do now
by laying bare the purpose of the political combinations
I was trying to effect.
My educational scheme was indeed the
starting-point of all the big project of conscious
public reconstruction at which I aimed. I wanted
to build up a new educational machine altogether for
the governing class out of a consolidated system of
special public service schools. I meant to get
to work upon this whatever office I was given in the
new government. I could have begun my plan from
the Admiralty or the War Office quite as easily as
from the Education Office. I am firmly convinced
it is hopeless to think of reforming the old public
schools and universities to meet the needs of a modern
state, they send their roots too deep and far, the
cost would exceed any good that could possibly be
effected, and so I have sought a way round this invincible
obstacle. I do think it would be quite practicable
to side-track, as the Americans say, the whole system
by creating hardworking, hard-living, modern and scientific
boys’ schools, first for the Royal Navy and then
for the public service generally, and as they grew,
opening them to the public without any absolute obligation
to subsequent service. Simultaneously with this
it would not be impossible to develop a new college
system with strong faculties in modern philosophy,
modern history, European literature and criticism,
physical and biological science, education and sociology.
We could in fact create a new liberal
education in this way, and cut the umbilicus of the
classical languages for good and all. I should
have set this going, and trusted it to correct or
kill the old public schools and the Oxford and Cambridge
tradition altogether. I had men in my mind to
begin the work, and I should have found others.
I should have aimed at making a hard-trained, capable,
intellectually active, proud type of man. Everything
else would have been made subservient to that.
I should have kept my grip on the men through their
vacation, and somehow or other I would have contrived
a young woman to match them. I think I could
have seen to it effectually enough that they didn’t
get at croquet and tennis with the vicarage daughters
and discover sex in the Peeping Tom fashion I did,
and that they realised quite early in life that it
isn’t really virile to reek of tobacco.
I should have had military manoeuvres, training ships,
aeroplane work, mountaineering and so forth, in the
place of the solemn trivialities of games, and I should
have fed and housed my men clean and very hard-where
there wasn’t any audit ale, no credit tradesmen,
and plenty of high pressure douches....
I have revisited Cambridge and Oxford
time after time since I came down, and so far as the
Empire goes, I want to get clear of those two places....
Always I renew my old feelings, a
physical oppression, a sense of lowness and dampness
almost exactly like the feeling of an underground
room where paper moulders and leaves the wall, a feeling
of ineradicable contagion in the Gothic buildings,
in the narrow ditch-like rivers, in those roads and
roads of stuffy little villas. Those little villas
have destroyed all the good of the old monastic system
and none of its evil....
Some of the most charming people in
the world live in them, but their collective effect
is below the quality of any individual among them.
Cambridge is a world of subdued tones, of excessively
subtle humours, of prim conduct and free thinking;
it fears the Parent, but it has no fear of God; it
offers amidst surroundings that vary between disguises
and antiquarian charm the inflammation of literature’s
purple draught; one hears there a peculiar thin scandal
like no other scandal in the world-a covetous
scandal-so that I am always reminded of
Ibsen in Cambridge. In Cambridge and the plays
of Ibsen alone does it seem appropriate for the heroine
before the great crisis of life to “enter, take
off her overshoes, and put her wet umbrella upon the
writing desk."...
We have to make a new Academic mind
for modern needs, and the last thing to make it out
of, I am convinced, is the old Academic mind.
One might as soon try to fake the old victory
at Portsmouth into a line of battleship again.
Besides which the old Academic mind, like those old
bathless, damp Gothic colleges, is much too delightful
in its peculiar and distinctive way to damage by futile
patching.
My heart warms to a sense of affectionate
absurdity as I recall dear old Codger, surely the
most “unleaderly” of men. No more
than from the old Schoolmen, his kindred, could one
get from him a School for Princes. Yet apart
from his teaching he was as curious and adorable as
a good Netsuke. Until quite recently he was a
power in Cambridge, he could make and bar and destroy,
and in a way he has become the quintessence of Cambridge
in my thoughts.
I see him on his way to the morning’s
lecture, with his plump childish face, his round innocent
eyes, his absurdly non-prehensile fat hand carrying
his cap, his grey trousers braced up much too high,
his feet a trifle inturned, and going across the great
court with a queer tripping pace that seemed cultivated
even to my naïve undergraduate eye. Or I see
him lecturing. He lectured walking up and down
between the desks, talking in a fluting rapid voice,
and with the utmost lucidity. If he could not
walk up and down he could not lecture. His mind
and voice had precisely the fluid quality of some
clear subtle liquid; one felt it could flow round
anything and overcome nothing. And its nimble
eddies were wonderful! Or again I recall him
drinking port with little muscular movements in his
neck and cheek and chin and his brows knit-very
judicial, very concentrated, preparing to say the apt
just thing; it was the last thing he would have told
a lie about.
When I think of Codger I am reminded
of an inscription I saw on some occasion in Regent’s
Park above two eyes scarcely more limpidly innocent
than his-“Born in the Menagerie.”
Never once since Codger began to display the early
promise of scholarship at the age of eight or more,
had he been outside the bars. His utmost travel
had been to lecture here and lecture there. His
student phase had culminated in papers of quite exceptional
brilliance, and he had gone on to lecture with a cheerful
combination of wit and mannerism that had made him
a success from the beginning. He has lectured
ever since. He lectures still. Year by year
he has become plumper, more rubicund and more and more
of an item for the intelligent visitor to see.
Even in my time he was pointed out to people as part
of our innumerable enrichments, and obviously he knew
it. He has become now almost the leading Character
in a little donnish world of much too intensely appreciated
Characters.
He boasted he took no exercise, and
also of his knowledge of port wine. Of other
wines he confessed quite frankly he had no “special
knowledge.” Beyond these things he had
little pride except that he claimed to have read every
novel by a woman writer that had ever entered the Union
Library. This, however, he held to be remarkable
rather than ennobling, and such boasts as he made
of it were tinged with playfulness. Certainly
he had a scholar’s knowledge of the works of
Miss Marie Corelli, Miss Braddon, Miss Elizabeth Glyn
and Madame Sarah Grand that would have astonished
and flattered those ladies enormously, and he loved
nothing so much in his hours of relaxation as to propound
and answer difficult questions upon their books.
Tusher of King’s was his ineffectual rival in
this field, their bouts were memorable and rarely other
than glorious for Codger; but then Tusher spread himself
too much, he also undertook to rehearse whole pages
out of Bradshaw, and tell you with all the changes
how to get from any station to any station in Great
Britain by the nearest and cheapest routes....
Codger lodged with a little deaf innocent
old lady, Mrs. Araminta Mergle, who was understood
to be herself a very redoubtable Character in the
Gyp-Bedder class; about her he related quietly absurd
anecdotes. He displayed a marvellous invention
in ascribing to her plausible expressions of opinion
entirely identical in import with those of the Oxford
and Harvard Pragmatists, against whom he waged a fierce
obscure war....
It was Codger’s function to
teach me philosophy, philosophy! the intimate wisdom
of things. He dealt in a variety of Hegelian stuff
like nothing else in the world, but marvellously consistent
with itself. It was a wonderful web he spun out
of that queer big active childish brain that had never
lusted nor hated nor grieved nor feared nor passionately
loved,-a web of iridescent threads.
He had luminous final theories about Love and Death
and Immortality, odd matters they seemed for him to
think about! and all his woven thoughts lay across
my perception of the realities of things, as flimsy
and irrelevant and clever and beautiful, oh!-as
a dew-wet spider’s web slung in the morning sunshine
across the black mouth of a gun....
4
All through those years of development
I perceive now there must have been growing in me,
slowly, irregularly, assimilating to itself all the
phrases and forms of patriotism, diverting my religious
impulses, utilising my esthetic tendencies, my dominating
idea, the statesman’s idea, that idea of social
service which is the protagonist of my story, that
real though complex passion for Making, making widely
and greatly, cities, national order, civilisation,
whose interplay with all those other factors in life
I have set out to present. It was growing in
me-as one’s bones grow, no man intending
it.
I have tried to show how, quite early
in my life, the fact of disorderliness, the conception
of social life as being a multitudinous confusion
out of hand, came to me. One always of course
simplifies these things in the telling, but I do not
think I ever saw the world at large in any other terms.
I never at any stage entertained the idea which sustained
my mother, and which sustains so many people in the
world,-the idea that the universe, whatever
superficial discords it may present, is as a matter
of fact “all right,” is being steered to
definite ends by a serene and unquestionable God.
My mother thought that Order prevailed, and that disorder
was just incidental and foredoomed rebellion; I feel
and have always felt that order rebels against and
struggles against disorder, that order has an up-hill
job, in gardens, experiments, suburbs, everything
alike; from the very beginnings of my experience I
discovered hostility to order, a constant escaping
from control.
The current of living and contemporary
ideas in which my mind was presently swimming made
all in the same direction; in place of my mother’s
attentive, meticulous but occasionally extremely irascible
Providence, the talk was all of the Struggle for Existence
and the survival not of the Best-that was
nonsense, but of the fittest to survive.
The attempts to rehabilitate Faith
in the form of the Individualist’s laissez
Faire never won upon me. I disliked Herbert
Spencer all my life until I read his autobiography,
and then I laughed a little and loved him. I
remember as early as the City Merchants’ days
how Britten and I scoffed at that pompous question-begging
word “Evolution,” having, so to speak,
found it out. Evolution, some illuminating talker
had remarked at the Britten lunch table, had led not
only to man, but to the liver-fluke and skunk, obviously
it might lead anywhere; order came into things only
through the struggling mind of man. That lit things
wonderfully for us. When I went up to Cambridge
I was perfectly clear that life was a various and
splendid disorder of forces that the spirit of man
sets itself to tame. I have never since fallen
away from that persuasion.
I do not think I was exceptionally
precocious in reaching these conclusions and a sort
of religious finality for myself by eighteen or nineteen.
I know men and women vary very much in these matters,
just as children do in learning to talk. Some
will chatter at eighteen months and some will hardly
speak until three, and the thing has very little to
do with their subsequent mental quality. So it
is with young people; some will begin their religious,
their social, their sexual interests at fourteen,
some not until far on in the twenties. Britten
and I belonged to one of the precocious types, and
Cossington very probably to another. It wasn’t
that there was anything priggish about any of us; we
should have been prigs to have concealed our spontaneous
interests and ape the theoretical boy.
The world of man centred for my imagination
in London, it still centres there; the real and present
world, that is to say, as distinguished from the wonder-lands
of atomic and microscopic science and the stars and
future time. I had travelled scarcely at all,
I had never crossed the Channel, but I had read copiously
and I had formed a very good working idea of this
round globe with its mountains and wildernesses and
forests and all the sorts and conditions of human
life that were scattered over its surface. It
was all alive, I felt, and changing every day; how
it was changing, and the changes men might bring about,
fascinated my mind beyond measure.
I used to find a charm in old maps
that showed The World as Known to the Ancients, and
I wish I could now without any suspicion of self-deception
write down compactly the world as it was known to me
at nineteen. So far as extension went it was,
I fancy, very like the world I know now at forty-two;
I had practically all the mountains and seas, boundaries
and races, products and possibilities that I have
now. But its intension was very different.
All the interval has been increasing and deepening
my social knowledge, replacing crude and second-hand
impressions by felt and realised distinctions.
In 1895-that was my last
year with Britten, for I went up to Cambridge in September-my
vision of the world had much the same relation to the
vision I have to-day that an ill-drawn daub of a mask
has to the direct vision of a human face. Britten
and I looked at our world and saw-what
did we see? Forms and colours side by side that
we had no suspicion were interdependent. We had
no conception of the roots of things nor of the reaction
of things. It did not seem to us, for example,
that business had anything to do with government,
or that money and means affected the heroic issues
of war. There were no wagons in our war game,
and where there were guns, there it was assumed the
ammunition was gathered together. Finance again
was a sealed book to us; we did not so much connect
it with the broad aspects of human affairs as regard
it as a sort of intrusive nuisance to be earnestly
ignored by all right-minded men. We had no conception
of the quality of politics, nor how “interests”
came into such affairs; we believed men were swayed
by purely intellectual convictions and were either
right or wrong, honest or dishonest (in which case
they deserved to be shot), good or bad. We knew
nothing of mental inertia, and could imagine the opinion
of a whole nation changed by one lucid and convincing
exposition. We were capable of the most incongruous
transfers from the scroll of history to our own times,
we could suppose Brixton ravaged and Hampstead burnt
in civil wars for the succession to the throne, or
Cheapside a lane of death and the front of the Mansion
House set about with guillotines in the course of
an accurately transposed French Revolution. We
rebuilt London by Act of Parliament, and once in a
mood of hygienic enterprise we transferred its population
en Masse to the North Downs by an order of
the Local Government Board. We thought nothing
of throwing religious organisations out of employment
or superseding all the newspapers by freely distributed
bulletins. We could contemplate the possibility
of laws abolishing whole classes; we were equal to
such a dream as the peaceful and orderly proclamation
of Communism from the steps of St. Paul’s Cathedral,
after the passing of a simply worded bill,-a
close and not unnaturally an exciting division carrying
the third reading. I remember quite distinctly
evolving that vision. We were then fully fifteen
and we were perfectly serious about it. We were
not fools; it was simply that as yet we had gathered
no experience at all of the limits and powers of legislation
and conscious collective intention....
I think this statement does my boyhood
justice, and yet I have my doubts. It is so hard
now to say what one understood and what one did not
understand. It isn’t only that every day
changed one’s general outlook, but also that
a boy fluctuates between phases of quite adult understanding
and phases of tawdrily magnificent puerility.
Sometimes I myself was in those tumbrils that went
along Cheapside to the Mansion House, a Sydney Cartonesque
figure, a white defeated Mirabean; sometimes it was
I who sat judging and condemning and ruling (sleeping
in my clothes and feeding very simply) the soul and
autocrat of the Provisional Government, which occupied,
of all inconvenient places! the General Post Office
at St. Martin’s-lé-Grand!...
I cannot trace the development of
my ideas at Cambridge, but I believe the mere physical
fact of going two hours’ journey away from London
gave that place for the first time an effect of unity
in my imagination. I got outside London.
It became tangible instead of being a frame almost
as universal as sea and sky.
At Cambridge my ideas ceased to live
in a duologue; in exchange for Britten, with whom,
however, I corresponded lengthily, stylishly and self-consciously
for some years, I had now a set of congenial friends.
I got talk with some of the younger dons, I learnt
to speak in the Union, and in my little set we were
all pretty busily sharpening each other’s wits
and correcting each other’s interpretations.
Cambridge made politics personal and actual.
At City Merchants’ we had had no sense of effective
contact; we boasted, it is true, an under secretary
and a colonial governor among our old boys, but they
were never real to us; such distinguished sons as
returned to visit the old school were allusive and
pleasant in the best Pinky Dinky style, and pretended
to be in earnest about nothing but our football and
cricket, to mourn the abolition of “water,”
and find a shuddering personal interest in the ancient
swishing block. At Cambridge I felt for the first
time that I touched the thing that was going on.
Real living statesmen came down to debate in the Union,
the older dons had been their college intimates, their
sons and nephews expounded them to us and made them
real to us. They invited us to entertain ideas;
I found myself for the first time in my life expected
to read and think and discuss, my secret vice had
become a virtue.
That combination-room world is at
last larger and more populous and various than the
world of schoolmasters. The Shoesmiths and Naylors
who had been the aristocracy of City Merchants’
fell into their place in my mind; they became an undistinguished
mass on the more athletic side of Pinky Dinkyism,
and their hostility to ideas and to the expression
of ideas ceased to limit and trouble me. The brighter
men of each generation stay up; these others go down
to propagate their tradition, as the fathers of families,
as mediocre professional men, as assistant masters
in schools. Cambridge which perfects them is by
the nature of things least oppressed by them,-except
when it comes to a vote in Convocation.
We were still in those days under
the shadow of the great Victorians. I never saw
Gladstone (as I never set eyes on the old Queen), but
he had resigned office only a year before I went up
to Trinity, and the Combination Rooms were full of
personal gossip about him and Disraeli and the other
big figures of the gladiatorial stage of Parlimentary
history, talk that leaked copiously into such sets
as mine. The ceiling of our guest chamber at
Trinity was glorious with the arms of Sir William
Harcourt, whose Death Duties had seemed at first like
a socialist dawn. Mr. Evesham we asked to come
to the Union every year, Masters, Chamberlain and
the old Duke of Devonshire; they did not come indeed,
but their polite refusals brought us all, as it were,
within personal touch of them. One heard of cabinet
councils and meetings at country houses. Some
of us, pursuing such interests, went so far as to
read political memoirs and the novels of Disraeli and
Mrs. Humphry Ward. From gossip, example and the
illustrated newspapers one learnt something of the
way in which parties were split, coalitions formed,
how permanent officials worked and controlled their
ministers, how measures were brought forward and projects
modified.
And while I was getting the great
leading figures on the political stage, who had been
presented to me in my schooldays not so much as men
as the pantomimic monsters of political caricature,
while I was getting them reduced in my imagination
to the stature of humanity, and their motives to the
quality of impulses like my own, I was also acquiring
in my Tripos work a constantly developing and enriching
conception of the world of men as a complex of economic,
intellectual and moral processes....
5
Socialism is an intellectual Proteus,
but to the men of my generation it came as the revolt
of the workers. Rodbertus we never heard of and
the Fabian Society we did not understand; Marx and
Morris, the Chicago Anarchists, justice and Social
Democratic Federation (as it was then) presented socialism
to our minds. Hatherleigh was the leading exponent
of the new doctrines in Trinity, and the figure upon
his wall of a huge-muscled, black-haired toiler swaggering
sledgehammer in hand across a revolutionary barricade,
seemed the quintessence of what he had to expound.
Landlord and capitalist had robbed and enslaved the
workers, and were driving them quite automatically
to inevitable insurrection. They would arise
and the capitalist system would flee and vanish like
the mists before the morning, like the dews before
the sunrise, giving place in the most simple and obvious
manner to an era of Right and Justice and Virtue and
Well Being, and in short a Perfectly Splendid Time.
I had already discussed this sort
of socialism under the guidance of Britten, before
I went up to Cambridge. It was all mixed up with
ideas about freedom and natural virtue and a great
scorn for kings, titles, wealth and officials, and
it was symbolised by the red ties we wore. Our
simple verdict on existing arrangements was that they
were “all wrong.” The rich were robbers
and knew it, kings and princes were usurpers and knew
it, religious teachers were impostors in league with
power, the economic system was an elaborate plot on
the part of the few to expropriate the many.
We went about feeling scornful of all the current
forms of life, forms that esteemed themselves solid,
that were, we knew, no more than shapes painted on
a curtain that was presently to be torn aside....
It was Hatherleigh’s poster
and his capacity for overstating things, I think,
that first qualified my simple revolutionary enthusiasm.
Perhaps also I had met with Fabian publications, but
if I did I forget the circumstances. And no doubt
my innate constructiveness with its practical corollary
of an analytical treatment of the material supplied,
was bound to push me on beyond this melodramatic interpretation
of human affairs.
I compared that Working Man of the
poster with any sort of working man I knew. I
perceived that the latter was not going to change,
and indeed could not under any stimulus whatever be
expected to change, into the former. It crept
into my mind as slowly and surely as the dawn creeps
into a room that the former was not, as I had at first
rather glibly assumed, an “ideal,” but
a complete misrepresentation of the quality and possibilities
of things.
I do not know now whether it was during
my school-days or at Cambridge that I first began
not merely to see the world as a great contrast of
rich and poor, but to feel the massive effect of that
multitudinous majority of people who toil continually,
who are for ever anxious about ways and means, who
are restricted, ill clothed, ill fed and ill housed,
who have limited outlooks and continually suffer misadventures,
hardships and distresses through the want of money.
My lot had fallen upon the fringe of the possessing
minority; if I did not know the want of necessities
I knew shabbiness, and the world that let me go on
to a university education intimated very plainly that
there was not a thing beyond the primary needs that
my stimulated imagination might demand that it would
not be an effort for me to secure. A certain aggressive
radicalism against the ruling and propertied classes
followed almost naturally from my circumstances.
It did not at first connect itself at all with the
perception of a planless disorder in human affairs
that had been forced upon me by the atmosphere of
my upbringing, nor did it link me in sympathy with
any of the profounder realities of poverty. It
was a personal independent thing. The dingier
people one saw in the back streets and lower quarters
of Bromstead and Penge, the drift of dirty children,
ragged old women, street loafers, grimy workers that
made the social background of London, the stories
one heard of privation and sweating, only joined up
very slowly with the general propositions I was making
about life. We could become splendidly eloquent
about the social revolution and the triumph of the
Proletariat after the Class war, and it was only by
a sort of inspiration that it came to me that my bedder,
a garrulous old thing with a dusty black bonnet over
one eye and an ostentatiously clean apron outside
the dark mysteries that clothed her, or the cheeky
little ruffians who yelled papers about the streets,
were really material to such questions.
Directly any of us young socialists
of Trinity found ourselves in immediate contact with
servants or cadgers or gyps or bedders or plumbers
or navvies or cabmen or railway porters we became unconsciously
and unthinkingly aristocrats. Our voices altered,
our gestures altered. We behaved just as all
the other men, rich or poor, swatters or sportsmen
or Pinky Dinkys, behaved, and exactly as we were expected
to behave. On the whole it is a population of
poor quality round about Cambridge, rather stunted
and spiritless and very difficult to idealise.
That theoretical Working Man of ours!-if
we felt the clash at all we explained it, I suppose,
by assuming that he came from another part of the
country; Esmeer, I remember, who lived somewhere in
the Fens, was very eloquent about the Cornish fishermen,
and Hatherleigh, who was a Hampshire man, assured
us we ought to know the Scottish miner. My private
fancy was for the Lancashire operative because of his
co-operative societies, and because what Lancashire
thinks to-day England thinks to-morrow.... And
also I had never been in Lancashire.
By little increments of realisation
it was that the profounder verities of the problem
of socialism came to me. It helped me very much
that I had to go down to the Potteries several times
to discuss my future with my uncle and guardian; I
walked about and saw Bursley Wakes and much of the
human aspects of organised industrialism at close quarters
for the first time. The picture of a splendid
Working Man cheated out of his innate glorious possibilities,
and presently to arise and dash this scoundrelly and
scandalous system of private ownership to fragments,
began to give place to a limitless spectacle of inefficiency,
to a conception of millions of people not organised
as they should be, not educated as they should be,
not simply prevented from but incapable of nearly
every sort of beauty, mostly kindly and well meaning,
mostly incompetent, mostly obstinate, and easily humbugged
and easily diverted. Even the tragic and inspiring
idea of Marx, that the poor were nearing a limit of
painful experience, and awakening to a sense of intolerable
wrongs, began to develop into the more appalling conception
that the poor were simply in a witless uncomfortable
inconclusive way-“muddling along”;
that they wanted nothing very definitely nor very urgently,
that mean fears enslaved them and mean satisfactions
decoyed them, that they took the very gift of life
itself with a spiritless lassitude, hoarding it, being
rather anxious not to lose it than to use it in any
way whatever.
The complete development of that realisation
was the work of many years. I had only the first
intimations at Cambridge. But I did have intimations.
Most acutely do I remember the doubts that followed
the visit of Chris Robinson. Chris Robinson was
heralded by such heroic anticipations, and he was
so entirely what we had not anticipated.
Hatherleigh got him to come, arranged
a sort of meeting for him at Redmayne’s rooms
in King’s, and was very proud and proprietorial.
It failed to stir Cambridge at all profoundly.
Beyond a futile attempt to screw up Hatherleigh made
by some inexpert duffers who used nails instead of
screws and gimlets, there was no attempt to rag.
Next day Chris Robinson went and spoke at Bennett
Hall in Newnham College, and left Cambridge in the
evening amidst the cheers of twenty men or so.
Socialism was at such a low ebb politically in those
days that it didn’t even rouse men to opposition.
And there sat Chris under that flamboyant
and heroic Worker of the poster, a little wrinkled
grey-bearded apologetic man in ready-made clothes,
with watchful innocent brown eyes and a persistent
and invincible air of being out of his element.
He sat with his stout boots tucked up under his chair,
and clung to a teacup and saucer and looked away from
us into the fire, and we all sat about on tables and
chair-arms and windowsills and boxes and anywhere except
upon chairs after the manner of young men. The
only other chair whose seat was occupied was the one
containing his knitted woollen comforter and his picturesque
old beach-photographer’s hat. We were all
shy and didn’t know how to take hold of him
now we had got him, and, which was disconcertingly
unanticipated, he was manifestly having the same difficulty
with us. We had expected to be gripped.
“I’ll not be knowing what
to say to these Chaps,” he repeated with a north-country
quality in his speech.
We made reassuring noises.
The Ambassador of the Workers stirred
his tea earnestly through an uncomfortable pause.
“I’d best tell ’em
something of how things are in Lancashire, what with
the new machines and all that,” he speculated
at last with red reflections in his thoughtful eyes.
We had an inexcusable dread that perhaps
he would make a mess of the meeting.
But when he was no longer in the unaccustomed
meshes of refined conversation, but speaking with
an audience before him, he became a different man.
He declared he would explain to us just exactly what
socialism was, and went on at once to an impassioned
contrast of social conditions. “You young
men,” he said “come from homes of luxury;
every need you feel is supplied-”
We sat and stood and sprawled about
him, occupying every inch of Redmayne’s floor
space except the hearthrug-platform, and we listened
to him and thought him over. He was the voice
of wrongs that made us indignant and eager. We
forgot for a time that he had been shy and seemed
not a little incompetent, his provincial accent became
a beauty of his earnest speech, we were carried away
by his indignations. We looked with shining
eyes at one another and at the various dons who had
dropped in and were striving to maintain a front of
judicious severity. We felt more and more that
social injustice must cease, and cease forthwith.
We felt we could not sleep upon it. At the end
we clapped and murmured our applause and wanted badly
to cheer.
Then like a lancet stuck into a bladder
came the heckling. Denson, that indolent, liberal-minded
sceptic, did most of the questioning. He lay
contorted in a chair, with his ugly head very low,
his legs crossed and his left boot very high, and
he pointed his remarks with a long thin hand and occasionally
adjusted the unstable glasses that hid his watery
eyes. “I don’t want to carp,”
he began. “The present system, I admit,
stands condemned. Every present system always
has stood condemned in the minds of intelligent
men. But where it seems to me you get thin, is
just where everybody has been thin, and that’s
when you come to the remedy.”
“Socialism,” said Chris
Robinson, as if it answered everything, and Hatherleigh
said “Hear! Hear!” very resolutely.
“I suppose I ought to take
that as an answer,” said Denson, getting his
shoulder-blades well down to the seat of his chair;
“but I don’t. I don’t, you
know. It’s rather a shame to cross-examine
you after this fine address of yours”-Chris
Robinson on the hearthrug made acquiescent and inviting
noises-“but the real question remains
how exactly are you going to end all these wrongs?
There are the administrative questions. If you
abolish the private owner, I admit you abolish a very
complex and clumsy way of getting businesses run,
land controlled and things in general administered,
but you don’t get rid of the need of administration,
you know.”
“Democracy,” said Chris Robinson.
“Organised somehow,” said
Denson. “And it’s just the How perplexes
me. I can quite easily imagine a socialist state
administered in a sort of scrambling tumult that would
be worse than anything we have got now.
“Nothing could be worse than
things are now,” said Chris Robinson. “I
have seen little children-”
“I submit life on an ill-provisioned
raft, for example, could easily be worse-or
life in a beleagured town.”
Murmurs.
They wrangled for some time, and it
had the effect upon me of coming out from the glow
of a good matinee performance into the cold daylight
of late afternoon. Chris Robinson did not shine
in conflict with Denson; he was an orator and not
a dialectician, and he missed Denson’s points
and displayed a disposition to plunge into untimely
pathos and indignation. And Denson hit me curiously
hard with one of his shafts. “Suppose,”
he said, “you found yourself prime minister-”
I looked at Chris Robinson, bright-eyed
and his hair a little ruffled and his whole being
rhetorical, and measured him against the huge machine
of government muddled and mysterious. Oh! but
I was perplexed!
And then we took him back to Hatherleigh’s
rooms and drank beer and smoked about him while he
nursed his knee with hairy wristed hands that protruded
from his flannel shirt, and drank lemonade under the
cartoon of that emancipated Worker, and we had a great
discursive talk with him.
“Eh! you should see our big meetings up north?”
he said.
Denson had ruffled him and worried
him a good deal, and ever and again he came back to
that discussion. “It’s all very easy
for your learned men to sit and pick holes,”
he said, “while the children suffer and die.
They don’t pick holes up north. They mean
business.”
He talked, and that was the most interesting
part of it all, of his going to work in a factory
when he was twelve-“when you Chaps
were all with your mammies “-and
how he had educated himself of nights until he would
fall asleep at his reading.
“It’s made many of us
keen for all our lives,” he remarked, “all
that clemming for education. Why! I longed
all through one winter to read a bit of Darwin.
I must know about this Darwin if I die for it, I said.
And I could no’ get the book.”
Hatherleigh made an enthusiastic noise
and drank beer at him with round eyes over the mug.
“Well, anyhow I wasted no time
on Greek and Latin,” said Chris Robinson.
“And one learns to go straight at a thing without
splitting straws. One gets hold of the Elementals.”
(Well, did they? That was the gist of my perplexity.)
“One doesn’t quibble,”
he said, returning to his rankling memory of Denson,
“while men decay and starve.”
“But suppose,” I said,
suddenly dropping into opposition, “the alternative
is to risk a worse disaster-or do something
patently futile.”
“I don’t follow that,”
said Chris Robinson. “We don’t propose
anything futile, so far as I can see.”
6
The prevailing force in my undergraduate
days was not Socialism but Kiplingism. Our set
was quite exceptional in its socialistic professions.
And we were all, you must understand, very distinctly
Imperialists also, and professed a vivid sense of the
“White Man’s Burden.”
It is a little difficult now to get
back to the feelings of that period; Kipling has since
been so mercilessly and exhaustively mocked, criticised
and torn to shreds;-never was a man so violently
exalted and then, himself assisting, so relentlessly
called down. But in the middle nineties this
spectacled and moustached little figure with its heavy
chin and its general effect of vehement gesticulation,
its wild shouts of boyish enthusiasm for effective
force, its lyric delight in the sounds and colours,
in the very odours of empire, its wonderful discovery
of machinery and cotton waste and the under officer
and the engineer, and “shop” as a poetic
dialect, became almost a national symbol. He
got hold of us wonderfully, he filled us with tinkling
and haunting quotations, he stirred Britten and myself
to futile imitations, he coloured the very idiom of
our conversation. He rose to his climax with
his “Recessional,” while I was still an
undergraduate.
What did he give me exactly?
He helped to broaden my geographical
sense immensely, and he provided phrases for just
that desire for discipline and devotion and organised
effort the Socialism of our time failed to express,
that the current socialist movement still fails, I
think, to express. The sort of thing that follows,
for example, tore something out of my inmost nature
and gave it a shape, and I took it back from him shaped
and let much of the rest of him, the tumult and the
bullying, the hysteria and the impatience, the incoherence
and inconsistency, go uncriticised for the sake of
it:-
“Keep ye the Law-be
swift in all obedience-Clear the land of
evil, drive the road and bridge the ford, Make ye
sure to each his own That he reap where he hath sown;
By the peace among Our peoples let men know we serve
the Lord!”
And then again, and for all our later
criticism, this sticks in my mind, sticks there now
as quintessential wisdom:
“The ’eathen
in ‘is blindness bows down to wood an’
stone;
’E don’t
obey no orders unless they is ’is own;
’E keeps ’is
side-arms awful: ’e leaves ’em all
about
An’ then comes
up the regiment an’ pokes the ’eathen out.
All
along o’ dirtiness, all along o’ mess,
All
along o’ doin’ things rather-more-or-less,
All
along of abby-nay, kul, an’ hazar-ho,
Mind
you keep your rifle an’ yourself jus’ so!”
It is after all a secondary matter
that Kipling, not having been born and brought up
in Bromstead and Penge, and the war in South Africa
being yet in the womb of time, could quite honestly
entertain the now remarkable delusion that England
had her side-arms at that time kept anything but “awful.”
He learnt better, and we all learnt with him in the
dark years of exasperating and humiliating struggle
that followed, and I do not see that we fellow learners
are justified in turning resentfully upon him for
a common ignorance and assumption....
South Africa seems always painted
on the back cloth of my Cambridge memories. How
immense those disasters seemed at the time, disasters
our facile English world has long since contrived in
any edifying or profitable sense to forget! How
we thrilled to the shouting newspaper sellers as the
first false flush of victory gave place to the realisation
of defeat. Far away there our army showed itself
human, mortal and human in the sight of all the world,
the pleasant officers we had imagined would change
to wonderful heroes at the first crackling of rifles,
remained the pleasant, rather incompetent men they
had always been, failing to imagine, failing to plan
and co-operate, failing to grip. And the common
soldiers, too, they were just what our streets and
country-side had made them, no sudden magic came out
of the war bugles for them. Neither splendid
nor disgraceful were they,-just ill-trained
and fairly plucky and wonderfully good-tempered men-paying
for it. And how it lowered our vitality all that
first winter to hear of Nicholson’s Nek, and
then presently close upon one another, to realise the
bloody waste of Magersfontein, the shattering retreat
from Stormberg, Colenso-Colenso, that blundering
battle, with White, as it seemed, in Ladysmith near
the point of surrender! and so through the long unfolding
catalogue of bleak disillusionments, of aching, unconcealed
anxiety lest worse should follow. To advance
upon your enemy singing about his lack of cleanliness
and method went out of fashion altogether! The
dirty retrogressive Boer vanished from our scheme
of illusion.
All through my middle Cambridge period,
the guns boomed and the rifles crackled away there
on the veldt, and the horsemen rode and the tale of
accidents and blundering went on. Men, mules,
horses, stores and money poured into South Africa,
and the convalescent wounded streamed home. I
see it in my memory as if I had looked at it through
a window instead of through the pages of the illustrated
papers; I recall as if I had been there the wide open
spaces, the ragged hillsides, the open order attacks
of helmeted men in khaki, the scarce visible smoke
of the guns, the wrecked trains in great lonely places,
the burnt isolated farms, and at last the blockhouses
and the fences of barbed wire uncoiling and spreading
for endless miles across the desert, netting the elusive
enemy until at last, though he broke the meshes again
and again, we had him in the toils. If one’s
attention strayed in the lecture-room it wandered to
those battle-fields.
And that imagined panorama of war
unfolds to an accompaniment of yelling newsboys in
the narrow old Cambridge streets, of the flicker of
papers hastily bought and torn open in the twilight,
of the doubtful reception of doubtful victories, and
the insensate rejoicings at last that seemed to some
of us more shameful than defeats....
7
A book that stands out among these
memories, that stimulated me immensely so that I forced
it upon my companions, half in the spirit of propaganda
and half to test it by their comments, was Meredith’s
one of our conquerors. It
is one of the books that have made me. In that
I got a supplement and corrective of Kipling.
It was the first detached and adverse criticism of
the Englishman I had ever encountered. It must
have been published already nine or ten years when
I read it. The country had paid no heed to it,
had gone on to the expensive lessons of the War because
of the dull aversion our people feel for all such intimations,
and so I could read it as a book justified. The
war endorsed its every word for me, underlined each
warning indication of the gigantic dangers that gathered
against our system across the narrow seas. It
discovered Europe to me, as watching and critical.
But while I could respond to all its
criticisms of my country’s intellectual indolence,
of my country’s want of training and discipline
and moral courage, I remember that the idea that on
the continent there were other peoples going ahead
of us, mentally alert while we fumbled, disciplined
while we slouched, aggressive and preparing to bring
our Imperial pride to a reckoning, was extremely novel
and distasteful to me. It set me worrying of
nights. It put all my projects for social and
political reconstruction upon a new uncomfortable footing.
It made them no longer merely desirable but urgent.
Instead of pride and the love of making one might
own to a baser motive. Under Kipling’s sway
I had a little forgotten the continent of Europe,
treated it as a mere envious echo to our own world-wide
display. I began now to have a disturbing sense
as it were of busy searchlights over the horizon....
One consequence of the patriotic chagrin
Meredith produced in me was an attempt to belittle
his merit. “It isn’t a good novel,
anyhow,” I said.
The charge I brought against it was,
I remember, a lack of unity. It professed to
be a study of the English situation in the early nineties,
but it was all deflected, I said, and all the interest
was confused by the story of Victor Radnor’s
fight with society to vindicate the woman he had loved
and never married. Now in the retrospect and with
a mind full of bitter enlightenment, I can do Meredith
justice, and admit the conflict was not only essential
but cardinal in his picture, that the terrible inflexibility
of the rich aunts and the still more terrible claim
of Mrs. Burman Radnor, the “infernal punctilio,”
and Dudley Sowerby’s limitations, were the central
substance of that inalertness the book set itself
to assail. So many things have been brought together
in my mind that were once remotely separated.
A people that will not valiantly face and understand
and admit love and passion can understand nothing
whatever. But in those days what is now just obvious
truth to me was altogether outside my range of comprehension....
8
As I seek to recapitulate the interlacing
growth of my apprehension of the world, as I flounder
among the half-remembered developments that found
me a crude schoolboy and left me a man, there comes
out, as if it stood for all the rest, my first holiday
abroad. That did not happen until I was twenty-two.
I was a fellow of Trinity, and the Peace of Vereeniging
had just been signed.
I went with a man named Willersley,
a man some years senior to myself, who had just missed
a fellowship and the higher division of the Civil
Service, and who had become an enthusiastic member
of the London School Board, upon which the cumulative
vote and the support of the “advanced”
people had placed him. He had, like myself, a
small independent income that relieved him of any
necessity to earn a living, and he had a kindred craving
for social theorising and some form of social service.
He had sought my acquaintance after reading a paper
of mine (begotten by the visit of Chris Robinson)
on the limits of pure democracy. It had marched
with some thoughts of his own.
We went by train to Spiez on the Lake
of Thun, then up the Gemmi, and thence with one
or two halts and digressions and a little modest climbing
we crossed over by the Antrona pass (on which we were
benighted) into Italy, and by way of Domo D’ossola
and the Santa Maria Maggiore valley to Cannobio, and
thence up the lake to Locarno (where, as I shall tell,
we stayed some eventful days) and so up the Val Maggia
and over to Airolo and home.
As I write of that long tramp of ours,
something of its freshness and enlargement returns
to me. I feel again the faint pleasant excitement
of the boat train, the trampling procession of people
with hand baggage and laden porters along the platform
of the Folkestone pier, the scarcely perceptible swaying
of the moored boat beneath our feet. Then, very
obvious and simple, the little emotion of standing
out from the homeland and seeing the long white Kentish
cliffs recede. One walked about the boat doing
one’s best not to feel absurdly adventurous,
and presently a movement of people directed one’s
attention to a white lighthouse on a cliff to the
east of us, coming up suddenly; and then one turned
to scan the little different French coast villages,
and then, sliding by in a pale sunshine came a long
wooden pier with oddly dressed children upon it, and
the clustering town of Boulogne.
One took it all with the outward calm
that became a young man of nearly three and twenty,
but one was alive to one’s finger-tips with pleasing
little stimulations. The custom house examination
excited one, the strangeness of a babble in a foreign
tongue; one found the French of City Merchants’
and Cambridge a shy and viscous flow, and then one
was standing in the train as it went slowly through
the rail-laid street to Boulogne Ville, and one looked
out at the world in French, porters in blouses, workmen
in enormous purple trousers, police officers in peaked
caps instead of helmets and romantically cloaked, big
carts, all on two wheels instead of four, green shuttered
casements instead of sash windows, and great numbers
of neatly dressed women in economical mourning.
“Oh! there’s a priest!”
one said, and was betrayed into suchlike artless cries.
It was a real other world, with different
government and different methods, and in the night
one was roused from uneasy slumbers and sat blinking
and surly, wrapped up in one’s couverture
and with one’s oreiller all awry, to encounter
a new social phenomenon, the German official, so different
in manner from the British; and when one woke again
after that one had come to Bale, and out one tumbled
to get coffee in Switzerland....
I have been over that route dozens
of times since, but it still revives a certain lingering
youthfulness, a certain sense of cheerful release in
me.
I remember that I and Willersley became
very sociological as we ran on to Spiez, and made
all sorts of generalisations from the steeply sloping
fields on the hillsides, and from the people we saw
on platforms and from little differences in the way
things were done.
The clean prosperity of Bale and Switzerland,
the big clean stations, filled me with patriotic misgivings,
as I thought of the vast dirtiness of London, the
mean dirtiness of Cambridgeshire. It came to me
that perhaps my scheme of international values was
all wrong, that quite stupendous possibilities and
challenges for us and our empire might be developing
here-and I recalled Meredith’s Skepsey
in France with a new understanding.
Willersley had dressed himself in
a world-worn Norfolk suit of greenish grey tweeds
that ended unfamiliarly at his rather impending, spectacled,
intellectual visage. I didn’t, I remember,
like the contrast of him with the drilled Swiss and
Germans about us. Convict coloured stockings
and vast hobnail boots finished him below, and all
his luggage was a borrowed rucksac that he had tied
askew. He did not want to shave in the train,
but I made him at one of the Swiss stations-I
dislike these Oxford slovenlinesses-and
then confound him! he cut himself and bled....
Next morning we were breathing a thin
exhilarating air that seemed to have washed our very
veins to an incredible cleanliness, and eating hard-boiled
eggs in a vast clear space of rime-edged rocks, snow-mottled,
above a blue-gashed glacier. All about us the
monstrous rock surfaces rose towards the shining peaks
above, and there were winding moraines from which
the ice had receded, and then dark clustering fir
trees far below.
I had an extraordinary feeling of
having come out of things, of being outside.
“But this is the round world!”
I said, with a sense of never having perceived it
before; “this is the round world!”
9
That holiday was full of big comprehensive
effects; the first view of the Rhone valley and the
distant Valaisian Alps, for example, which we saw
from the shoulder of the mountain above the Gemmi,
and the early summer dawn breaking over Italy as we
moved from our night’s crouching and munched
bread and chocolate and stretched our stiff limbs among
the tumbled and precipitous rocks that hung over Lake
Cingolo, and surveyed the winding tiring rocky track
going down and down to Antronapiano.
And our thoughts were as comprehensive
as our impressions. Willersley’s mind abounded
in historical matter; he had an inaccurate abundant
habit of topographical reference; he made me see and
trace and see again the Roman Empire sweep up these
winding valleys, and the coming of the first great
Peace among the warring tribes of men....
In the retrospect each of us seems
to have been talking about our outlook almost continually.
Each of us, you see, was full of the same question,
very near and altogether predominant to us, the question:
“What am I going to do with my life?” He
saw it almost as importantly as I, but from a different
angle, because his choice was largely made and mine
still hung in the balance.
“I feel we might do so many
things,” I said, “and everything that calls
one, calls one away from something else.”
Willersley agreed without any modest disavowals.
“We have got to think out,”
he said, “just what we are and what we are up
to. We’ve got to do that now. And then-it’s
one of those questions it is inadvisable to reopen
subsequently.”
He beamed at me through his glasses.
The sententious use of long words was a playful habit
with him, that and a slight deliberate humour, habits
occasional Extension Lecturing was doing very much
to intensify.
“You’ve made your decision?”
He nodded with a peculiar forward movement of his
head.
“How would you put it?”
“Social Service-education.
Whatever else matters or doesn’t matter, it
seems to me there is one thing we must have and
increase, and that is the number of people who can
think a little-and have”-he
beamed again-“an adequate sense of
causation.”
“You’re sure it’s worth while.”
“For me-certainly. I don’t
discuss that any more.”
“I don’t limit myself
too narrowly,” he added. “After all,
the work is all one. We who know, we who feel,
are building the great modern state, joining wall
to wall and way to way, the new great England rising
out of the decaying old... we are the real statesmen-I
like that use of ’statesmen.’...”
“Yes,” I said with many doubts. “Yes,
of course....”
Willersley is middle-aged now, with
silver in his hair and a deepening benevolence in
his always amiable face, and he has very fairly kept
his word. He has lived for social service and
to do vast masses of useful, undistinguished, fertilising
work. Think of the days of arid administrative
plodding and of contention still more arid and unrewarded,
that he must have spent! His little affectations
of gesture and manner, imitative affectations for
the most part, have increased, and the humorous beam
and the humorous intonations have become a thing he
puts on every morning like an old coat. His devotion
is mingled with a considerable whimsicality, and they
say he is easily flattered by subordinates and easily
offended into opposition by colleagues; he has made
mistakes at times and followed wrong courses, still
there he is, a flat contradiction to all the ordinary
doctrine of motives, a man who has foregone any chances
of wealth and profit, foregone any easier paths to
distinction, foregone marriage and parentage, in order
to serve the community. He does it without any
fee or reward except his personal self-satisfaction
in doing this work, and he does it without any hope
of future joys and punishments, for he is an implacable
Rationalist. No doubt he idealises himself a
little, and dreams of recognition. No doubt he
gets his pleasure from a sense of power, from the spending
and husbanding of large sums of public money, and from
the inevitable proprietorship he must feel in the
fair, fine, well-ordered schools he has done so much
to develop. “But for me,” he can say,
“there would have been a Job about those diagrams,
and that subject or this would have been less ably
taught."...
The fact remains that for him the
rewards have been adequate, if not to content at any
rate to keep him working. Of course he covets
the notice of the world he has served, as a lover
covets the notice of his mistress. Of course
he thinks somewhere, somewhen, he will get credit.
Only last year I heard some men talking of him, and
they were noting, with little mean smiles, how he
had shown himself self-conscious while there was talk
of some honorary degree-giving or other; it would,
I have no doubt, please him greatly if his work were
to flower into a crimson gown in some Academic parterre.
Why shouldn’t it? But that is incidental
vanity at the worst; he goes on anyhow. Most men
don’t.
But we had our walk twenty years and
more ago now. He was oldish even then as a young
man, just as he is oldish still in middle age.
Long may his industrious elderliness flourish for
the good of the world! He lectured a little in
conversation then; he lectures more now and listens
less, toilsomely disentangling what you already understand,
giving you in detail the data you know; these are
things like callosities that come from a man’s
work.
Our long three weeks’ talk comes
back to me as a memory of ideas and determinations
slowly growing, all mixed up with a smell of wood smoke
and pine woods and huge precipices and remote gleams
of snow-fields and the sound of cascading torrents
rushing through deep gorges far below. It is
mixed, too, with gossips with waitresses and fellow
travellers, with my first essays in colloquial German
and Italian, with disputes about the way to take,
and other things that I will tell of in another section.
But the white passion of human service was our dominant
theme. Not simply perhaps nor altogether unselfishly,
but quite honestly, and with at least a frequent self-forgetfulness,
did we want to do fine and noble things, to help in
their developing, to lessen misery, to broaden and
exalt life. It is very hard-perhaps
it is impossible-to present in a page or
two the substance and quality of nearly a month’s
conversation, conversation that is casual and discursive
in form, that ranges carelessly from triviality to
immensity, and yet is constantly resuming a constructive
process, as workmen on a wall loiter and jest and
go and come back, and all the while build.
We got it more and more definite that
the core of our purpose beneath all its varied aspects
must needs be order and discipline. “Muddle,”
said I, “is the enemy.” That remains
my belief to this day. Clearness and order, light
and foresight, these things I know for Good. It
was muddle had just given us all the still freshly
painful disasters and humiliations of the war, muddle
that gives us the visibly sprawling disorder of our
cities and industrial country-side, muddle that gives
us the waste of life, the limitations, wretchedness
and unemployment of the poor. Muddle! I
remember myself quoting Kipling-
“All along o’
dirtiness, all along o’ mess,
All along o’ doin’
things rather-more-or-less.”
“We build the state,”
we said over and over again. “That is what
we are for-servants of the new reorganisation!”
We planned half in earnest and half
Utopianising, a League of Social Service.
We talked of the splendid world of
men that might grow out of such unpaid and ill-paid
work as we were setting our faces to do. We spoke
of the intricate difficulties, the monstrous passive
resistances, the hostilities to such a development
as we conceived our work subserved, and we spoke with
that underlying confidence in the invincibility of
the causes we adopted that is natural to young and
scarcely tried men.
We talked much of the detailed life
of politics so far as it was known to us, and there
Willersley was more experienced and far better informed
than I; we discussed possible combinations and possible
developments, and the chances of some great constructive
movement coming from the heart-searchings the Boer
war had occasioned. We would sink to gossip-even
at the Suetonius level. Willersley would decline
towards illuminating anecdotes that I capped more
or less loosely from my private reading. We were
particularly wise, I remember, upon the management
of newspapers, because about that we knew nothing whatever.
We perceived that great things were to be done through
newspapers. We talked of swaying opinion and
moving great classes to massive action.
Men are egotistical even in devotion.
All our splendid projects were thickset with the first
personal pronoun. We both could write, and all
that we said in general terms was reflected in the
particular in our minds; it was ourselves we saw,
and no others, writing and speaking that moving word.
We had already produced manuscript and passed the
initiations of proof reading; I had been a frequent
speaker in the Union, and Willersley was an active
man on the School Board. Our feet were already
on the lower rungs that led up and up. He was
six and twenty, and I twenty-two. We intimated
our individual careers in terms of bold expectation.
I had prophetic glimpses of walls and hoardings clamorous
with “Vote for Remington,” and Willersley
no doubt saw himself chairman of this committee and
that, saying a few slightly ironical words after the
declaration of the poll, and then sitting friendly
beside me on the government benches. There was
nothing impossible in such dreams. Why not the
Board of Education for him? My preference at
that time wavered between the Local Government Board-I
had great ideas about town-planning, about revisions
of municipal areas and re-organised internal transit-and
the War Office. I swayed strongly towards the
latter as the journey progressed. My educational
bias came later.
The swelling ambitions that have tramped
over Alpine passes! How many of them, like mine,
have come almost within sight of realisation before
they failed?
There were times when we posed like
young gods (of unassuming exterior), and times when
we were full of the absurdest little solicitudes about
our prospects. There were times when one surveyed
the whole world of men as if it was a little thing
at one’s feet, and by way of contrast I remember
once lying in bed-it must have been during
this holiday, though I cannot for the life of me fix
where-and speculating whether perhaps some
day I might not be a K. C. B., Sir Richard Remington,
K. C. B., M. P.
But the big style prevailed....
We could not tell from minute to minute
whether we were planning for a world of solid reality,
or telling ourselves fairy tales about this prospect
of life. So much seemed possible, and everything
we could think of so improbable. There were lapses
when it seemed to me I could never be anything but
just the entirely unimportant and undistinguished young
man I was for ever and ever. I couldn’t
even think of myself as five and thirty.
Once I remember Willersley going over
a list of failures, and why they had failed-but
young men in the twenties do not know much about failures.
10
Willersley and I professed ourselves
Socialists, but by this time I knew my Rodbertus as
well as my Marx, and there was much in our socialism
that would have shocked Chris Robinson as much as anything
in life could have shocked him. Socialism as
a simple democratic cry we had done with for ever.
We were socialists because Individualism for us meant
muddle, meant a crowd of separated, undisciplined
little people all obstinately and ignorantly doing
things jarringly, each one in his own way. “Each,”
I said quoting words of my father’s that rose
apt in my memory, “snarling from his own little
bit of property, like a dog tied to a cart’s
tail.”
“Essentially,” said Willersley,
“essentially we’re for conscription, in
peace and war alike. The man who owns property
is a public official and has to behave as such.
That’s the gist of socialism as I understand
it.”
“Or be dismissed from his post,”
I said, “and replaced by some better sort of
official. A man’s none the less an official
because he’s irresponsible. What he does
with his property affects people just the same.
Private! No one is really private but an outlaw....”
Order and devotion were the very essence
of our socialism, and a splendid collective vigour
and happiness its end. We projected an ideal
state, an organised state as confident and powerful
as modern science, as balanced and beautiful as a
body, as beneficent as sunshine, the organised state
that should end muddle for ever; it ruled all our ideals
and gave form to all our ambitions.
Every man was to be definitely related
to that, to have his predominant duty to that.
Such was the England renewed we had in mind, and how
to serve that end, to subdue undisciplined worker
and undisciplined wealth to it, and make the Scientific
Commonweal, King, was the continuing substance of
our intercourse.
11
Every day the wine of the mountains
was stronger in our blood, and the flush of our youth
deeper. We would go in the morning sunlight along
some narrow Alpine mule-path shouting large suggestions
for national reorganisation, and weighing considerations
as lightly as though the world was wax in our hands.
“Great England,” we said in effect, over
and over again, “and we will be among the makers!
England renewed! The country has been warned;
it has learnt its lesson. The disasters and anxieties
of the war have sunk in. England has become serious....
Oh! there are big things before us to do; big enduring
things!”
One evening we walked up to the loggia
of a little pilgrimage church, I forget its name,
that stands out on a conical hill at the head of a
winding stair above the town of Locarno. Down
below the houses clustered amidst a confusion of heat-bitten
greenery. I had been sitting silently on the
parapet, looking across to the purple mountain masses
where Switzerland passes into Italy, and the drift
of our talk seemed suddenly to gather to a head.
I broke into speech, giving form to
the thoughts that had been accumulating. My words
have long since passed out of my memory, the phrases
of familiar expression have altered for me, but the
substance remains as clear as ever. I said how
we were in our measure emperors and kings, men undriven,
free to do as we pleased with life; we classed among
the happy ones, our bread and common necessities were
given us for nothing, we had abilities,-it
wasn’t modesty but cowardice to behave as if
we hadn’t-and Fortune watched us to
see what we might do with opportunity and the world.
“There are so many things to
do, you see,” began Willersley, in his judicial
lecturer’s voice.
“So many things we may do,”
I interrupted, “with all these years before
us.... We’re exceptional men. It’s
our place, our duty, to do things.”
“Here anyhow,” I said,
answering the faint amusement of his face; “I’ve
got no modesty. Everything conspires to set me
up. Why should I run about like all those grubby
little beasts down there, seeking nothing but mean
little vanities and indulgencies-and then
take credit for modesty? I know I am capable.
I know I have imagination. Modesty!
I know if I don’t attempt the very biggest things
in life I am a damned shirk. The very biggest!
Somebody has to attempt them. I feel like a loaded
gun that is only a little perplexed because it has
to find out just where to aim itself....”
The lake and the frontier villages,
a white puff of steam on the distant railway to Luino,
the busy boats and steamers trailing triangular wakes
of foam, the long vista eastward towards battlemented
Bellinzona, the vast mountain distances, now tinged
with sunset light, behind this nearer landscape, and
the southward waters with remote coast towns shining
dimly, waters that merged at last in a luminous golden
haze, made a broad panoramic spectacle. It was
as if one surveyed the world,-and it was
like the games I used to set out upon my nursery floor.
I was exalted by it; I felt larger than men. So
kings should feel.
That sense of largeness came to me
then, and it has come to me since, again and again,
a splendid intimation or a splendid vanity. Once,
I remember, when I looked at Genoa from the mountain
crest behind the town and saw that multitudinous place
in all its beauty of width and abundance and clustering
human effort, and once as I was steaming past the
brown low hills of Staten Island towards the towering
vigour and clamorous vitality of New York City, that
mood rose to its quintessence. And once it came
to me, as I shall tell, on Dover cliffs. And a
hundred times when I have thought of England as our
country might be, with no wretched poor, no wretched
rich, a nation armed and ordered, trained and purposeful
amidst its vales and rivers, that emotion of collective
ends and collective purposes has returned to me.
I felt as great as humanity. For a brief moment
I was humanity, looking at the world I had made and
had still to make....
12
And mingled with these dreams of power
and patriotic service there was another series of
a different quality and a different colour, like the
antagonistic colour of a shot silk. The white
life and the red life, contrasted and interchanged,
passing swiftly at a turn from one to another, and
refusing ever to mingle peacefully one with the other.
I was asking myself openly and distinctly: what
are you going to do for the world? What are you
going to do with yourself? and with an increasing
strength and persistence Nature in spite of my averted
attention was asking me in penetrating undertones:
what are you going to do about this other fundamental
matter, the beauty of girls and women and your desire
for them?
I have told of my sisterless youth
and the narrow circumstances of my upbringing.
It made all women-kind mysterious to me. If it
had not been for my Staffordshire cousins I do not
think I should have known any girls at all until I
was twenty. Of Staffordshire I will tell a little
later. But I can remember still how through all
those ripening years, the thought of women’s
beauty, their magic presence in the world beside me
and the unknown, untried reactions of their intercourse,
grew upon me and grew, as a strange presence grows
in a room when one is occupied by other things.
I busied myself and pretended to be wholly occupied,
and there the woman stood, full half of life neglected,
and it seemed to my averted mind sometimes that she
was there clad and dignified and divine, and sometimes
Aphrodite shining and commanding, and sometimes that
Venus who stoops and allures.
This travel abroad seemed to have
released a multitude of things in my mind; the clear
air, the beauty of the sunshine, the very blue of
the glaciers made me feel my body and quickened all
those disregarded dreams. I saw the sheathed
beauty of women’s forms all about me, in the
cheerful waitresses at the inns, in the pedestrians
one encountered in the tracks, in the chance fellow
travellers at the hotel tables. “Confound
it!” said I, and talked all the more zealously
of that greater England that was calling us.
I remember that we passed two Germans,
an old man and a tall fair girl, father and daughter,
who were walking down from Saas. She came swinging
and shining towards us, easy and strong. I worshipped
her as she approached.
“Gut Tag!” said Willersley, removing his
hat.
“Morgen!” said the old man, saluting.
I stared stockishly at the girl, who passed with an
indifferent face.
That sticks in my mind as a picture
remains in a room, it has kept there bright and fresh
as a thing seen yesterday, for twenty years....
I flirted hesitatingly once or twice
with comely serving girls, and was a little ashamed
lest Willersley should detect the keen interest I took
in them, and then as we came over the pass from Santa
Maria Maggiore to Cannobio, my secret preoccupation
took me by surprise and flooded me and broke down
my pretences.
The women in that valley are very
beautiful-women vary from valley to valley
in the Alps and are plain and squat here and divinities
five miles away-and as we came down we
passed a group of five or six of them resting by the
wayside. Their burthens were beside them, and
one like Ceres held a reaping hook in her brown hand.
She watched us approaching and smiled faintly, her
eyes at mine.
There was some greeting, and two of
them laughed together.
We passed.
“Glorious girls they were,”
said Willersley, and suddenly an immense sense of
boredom enveloped me. I saw myself striding on
down that winding road, talking of politics and parties
and bills of parliament and all sorts of dessicated
things. That road seemed to me to wind on for
ever down to dust and infinite dreariness. I knew
it for a way of death. Reality was behind us.
Willersley set himself to draw a sociological
moral. “I’m not so sure,” he
said in a voice of intense discriminations, “after
all, that agricultural work isn’t good for women.”
“Damn agricultural work!”
I said, and broke out into a vigorous cursing of all
I held dear. “Fettered things we are!”
I cried. “I wonder why I stand it!”
“Stand what?”
“Why don’t I go back and
make love to those girls and let the world and you
and everything go hang? Deep breasts and rounded
limbs-and we poor emasculated devils go
tramping by with the blood of youth in us!...”
“I’m not quite sure, Remington,”
said Willersley, looking at me with a deliberately
quaint expression over his glasses, “that picturesque
scenery is altogether good for your morals.”
That fever was still in my blood when we came to Locarno.
13
Along the hot and dusty lower road
between the Orrido of Traffiume and Cannobio
Willersley had developed his first blister. And
partly because of that and partly because there was
a bag at the station that gave us the refreshment
of clean linen and partly because of the lazy lower
air into which we had come, we decided upon three
or four days’ sojourn in the Empress Hotel.
We dined that night at a table-d’hote,
and I found myself next to an Englishwoman who began
a conversation that was resumed presently in the hotel
lounge. She was a woman of perhaps thirty-three
or thirty-four, slenderly built, with a warm reddish
skin and very abundant fair golden hair, the wife
of a petulant-looking heavy-faced man of perhaps fifty-three,
who smoked a cigar and dozed over his coffee and presently
went to bed. “He always goes to bed like
that,” she confided startlingly. “He
sleeps after all his meals. I never knew such
a man to sleep.”
Then she returned to our talk, whatever it was.
We had begun at the dinner table with
itineraries and the usual topographical talk, and
she had envied our pedestrian travel. “My
husband doesn’t walk,” she said. “His
heart is weak and he cannot manage the hills.”
There was something friendly and adventurous
in her manner; she conveyed she liked me, and when
presently Willersley drifted off to write letters
our talk sank at once to easy confidential undertones.
I felt enterprising, and indeed it is easy to be daring
with people one has never seen before and may never
see again. I said I loved beautiful scenery and
all beautiful things, and the pointing note in my voice
made her laugh. She told me I had bold eyes,
and so far as I can remember I said she made them
bold. “Blue they are,” she remarked,
smiling archly. “I like blue eyes.”
Then I think we compared ages, and she said she was
the Woman of Thirty, “George Moore’s Woman
of Thirty.”
I had not read George Moore at the
time, but I pretended to understand.
That, I think, was our limit that
evening. She went to bed, smiling good-night
quite prettily down the big staircase, and I and Willersley
went out to smoke in the garden. My head was full
of her, and I found it necessary to talk about her.
So I made her a problem in sociology. “Who
the deuce are these people?” I said, “and
how do they get a living? They seem to have plenty
of money. He strikes me as being-Willersley,
what is a drysalter? I think he’s a retired
drysalter.”
Willersley theorised while I thought
of the woman and that provocative quality of dash
she had displayed. The next day at lunch she and
I met like old friends. A huge mass of private
thinking during the interval had been added to our
effect upon one another. We talked for a time
of insignificant things.
“What do you do,” she
asked rather quickly, “after lunch? Take
a siesta?”
“Sometimes,” I said, and hung for a moment
eye to eye.
We hadn’t a doubt of each other,
but my heart was beating like a steamer propeller
when it lifts out of the water.
“Do you get a view from your
room?” she asked after a pause.
“It’s on the third floor,
Number seventeen, near the staircase. My friend’s
next door.”
She began to talk of books. She
was interested in Christian Science, she said, and
spoke of a book. I forget altogether what that
book was called, though I remember to this day with
the utmost exactness the purplish magenta of its cover.
She said she would lend it to me and hesitated.
Willersley wanted to go for an expedition
across the lake that afternoon, but I refused.
He made some other proposals that I rejected abruptly.
“I shall write in my room,” I said.
“Why not write down here?”
“I shall write in my room,”
I snarled like a thwarted animal, and he looked at
me curiously. “Very well,” he said;
“then I’ll make some notes and think about
that order of ours out under the magnolias.”
I hovered about the lounge for a time
buying postcards and feverishly restless, watching
the movements of the other people. Finally I went
up to my room and sat down by the windows, staring
out. There came a little tap at the unlocked
door and in an instant, like the go of a taut bowstring,
I was up and had it open.
“Here is that book,” she said, and we
hesitated.
“Come in!” I whispered, trembling
from head to foot.
“You’re just a boy,” she said in
a low tone.
I did not feel a bit like a lover,
I felt like a burglar with the safe-door nearly opened.
“Come in,” I said almost impatiently, for
anyone might be in the passage, and I gripped her wrist
and drew her towards me.
“What do you mean?” she
answered with a faint smile on her lips, and awkward
and yielding.
I shut the door behind her, still
holding her with one hand, then turned upon her-she
was laughing nervously-and without a word
drew her to me and kissed her. And I remember
that as I kissed her she made a little noise almost
like the purring miaow with which a cat will greet
one and her face, close to mine, became solemn and
tender.
She was suddenly a different being
from the discontented wife who had tapped a moment
since on my door, a woman transfigured....
That evening I came down to dinner
a monster of pride, for behold! I was a man.
I felt myself the most wonderful and unprecedented
of adventurers. It was hard to believe that any
one in the world before had done as much. My
mistress and I met smiling, we carried things off
admirably, and it seemed to me that Willersley was
the dullest old dog in the world. I wanted to
give him advice. I wanted to give him derisive
pokes. After dinner and coffee in the lounge I
was too excited and hilarious to go to bed, I made
him come with me down to the cafe under the arches
by the pier, and there drank beer and talked extravagant
nonsense about everything under the sun, in order not
to talk about the happenings of the afternoon.
All the time something shouted within me: “I
am a man! I am a man!"...
“What shall we do to-morrow?” said he.
“I’m for loafing,”
I said. “Let’s row in the morning
and spend to-morrow afternoon just as we did to-day.”
“They say the church behind the town is worth
seeing.”
“We’ll go up about sunset;
that’s the best time for it. We can start
about five.”
We heard music, and went further along
the arcade to discover a place where girls in operatic
Swiss peasant costume were singing and dancing on
a creaking, protesting little stage. I eyed their
generous display of pink neck and arm with the seasoned
eye of a man who has lived in the world. Life
was perfectly simple and easy, I felt, if one took
it the right way.
Next day Willersley wanted to go on,
but I delayed. Altogether I kept him back four
days. Then abruptly my mood changed, and we decided
to start early the following morning. I remember,
though a little indistinctly, the feeling of my last
talk with that woman whose surname, odd as it may
seem, either I never learnt or I have forgotten. (Her
christian name was Milly.) She was tired and rather
low-spirited, and disposed to be sentimental, and
for the first time in our intercourse I found myself
liking her for the sake of her own personality.
There was something kindly and generous appearing
behind the veil of naïve and uncontrolled sensuality
she had worn. There was a curious quality of
motherliness in her attitude to me that something in
my nature answered and approved. She didn’t
pretend to keep it up that she had yielded to my initiative.
“I’ve done you no harm,” she said
a little doubtfully, an odd note for a man’s
victim! And, “we’ve had a good time.
You have liked me, haven’t you?”
She interested me in her lonely dissatisfied
life; she was childless and had no hope of children,
and her husband was the only son of a rich meat salesman,
very mean, a mighty smoker-“he reeks
of it,” she said, “always”-and
interested in nothing but golf, billiards (which he
played very badly), pigeon shooting, convivial Free
Masonry and Stock Exchange punting. Mostly they
drifted about the Riviera. Her mother had contrived
her marriage when she was eighteen. They were
the first samples I ever encountered of the great
multitude of functionless property owners which encumbers
modern civilisation-but at the time I didn’t
think much of that aspect of them....
I tell all this business as it happened
without comment, because I have no comment to make.
It was all strange to me, strange rather than wonderful,
and, it may be, some dream of beauty died for ever
in those furtive meetings; it happened to me, and
I could scarcely have been more irresponsible in the
matter or controlled events less if I had been suddenly
pushed over a cliff into water. I swam, of course-finding
myself in it. Things tested me, and I reacted,
as I have told. The bloom of my innocence, if
ever there had been such a thing, was gone. And
here is the remarkable thing about it; at the time
and for some days I was over-weeningly proud; I have
never been so proud before or since; I felt I had
been promoted to virility; I was unable to conceal
my exultation from Willersley. It was a mood
of shining shameless ungracious self-approval.
As he and I went along in the cool morning sunshine
by the rice fields in the throat of the Val Maggia
a silence fell between us.
“You know?” I said abruptly,-“about
that woman?”
Willersley did not answer for a moment.
He looked at me over the corner of his spectacles.
“Things went pretty far?” he asked.
“Oh! all the way!” and
I had a twinge of fatuous pride in my unpremeditated
achievement.
“She came to your room?”
I nodded.
“I heard her. I heard her
whispering.... The whispering and rustling and
so on. I was in my room yesterday.... Any
one might have heard you.”
I went on with my head in the air.
“You might have been caught,
and that would have meant endless trouble. You
might have incurred all sorts of consequences.
What did you know about her?... We have wasted
four days in that hot close place. When we found
that League of Social Service we were talking about,”
he said with a determined eye upon me, “chastity
will be first among the virtues prescribed.”
“I shall form a rival league,”
I said a little damped. “I’m hanged
if I give up a single desire in me until I know why.”
He lifted his chin and stared before
him through his glasses at nothing. “There
are some things,” he said, “that a man
who means to work-to do great public services-must
turn his back upon. I’m not discussing the
rights or wrongs of this sort of thing. It happens
to be the conditions we work under. It will probably
always be so. If you want to experiment in that
way, if you want even to discuss it,-out
you go from political life. You must know that’s
so.... You’re a strange man, Remington,
with a kind of kink in you. You’ve a sort
of force. You might happen to do immense things....
Only-”
He stopped. He had said all that
he had forced himself to say.
“I mean to take myself as I
am,” I said. “I’m going to get
experience for humanity out of all my talents-and
bury nothing.”
Willersley twisted his face to its
humorous expression. “I doubt if sexual
proclivities,” he said drily, “come within
the scope of the parable.”
I let that go for a little while.
Then I broke out. “Sex!” said I, “is
a fundamental thing in life. We went through all
this at Trinity. I’m going to look at it,
experience it, think about it-and get it
square with the rest of life. Career and Politics
must take their chances of that. It’s part
of the general English slackness that they won’t
look this in the face. Gods! what a muffled time
we’re coming out of! Sex means breeding,
and breeding is a necessary function in a nation.
The Romans broke up upon that. The Americans fade
out amidst their successes. Eugenics-”
“That wasn’t Eugenics,” said
Willersley.
“It was a woman,” I said
after a little interval, feeling oddly that I had
failed altogether to answer him, and yet had a strong
dumb case against him.