orthodoxy-第13章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！





things　in　men　are　the　things　they　hold　in　common；　not　the　things



they　hold　separately。　　And　the　second　principle　is　merely　this：　



that　the　political　instinct　or　desire　is　one　of　these　things



which　they　hold　in　common。　　Falling　in　love　is　more　poetical　than



dropping　into　poetry。　　The　democratic　contention　is　that　government



（helping　to　rule　the　tribe）　is　a　thing　like　falling　in　love；



and　not　a　thing　like　dropping　into　poetry。　　It　is　not　something



analogous　to　playing　the　church　organ；　painting　on　vellum；



discovering　the　North　Pole　（that　insidious　habit）；　looping　the　loop；



being　Astronomer　Royal；　and　so　on。　　For　these　things　we　do　not　wish



a　man　to　do　at　all　unless　he　does　them　well。　　It　is；　on　the　contrary；



a　thing　analogous　to　writing　one's　own　love…letters　or　blowing



one's　own　nose。　　These　things　we　want　a　man　to　do　for　himself；



even　if　he　does　them　badly。　　I　am　not　here　arguing　the　truth　of　any



of　these　conceptions；　I　know　that　some　moderns　are　asking　to　have



their　wives　chosen　by　scientists；　and　they　may　soon　be　asking；



for　all　I　know；　to　have　their　noses　blown　by　nurses。　　I　merely



say　that　mankind　does　recognize　these　universal　human　functions；



and　that　democracy　classes　government　among　them。　　In　short；



the　democratic　faith　is　this：　　that　the　most　terribly　important　things



must　be　left　to　ordinary　men　themselvesthe　mating　of　the　sexes；



the　rearing　of　the　young；　the　laws　of　the　state。　　This　is　democracy；



and　in　this　I　have　always　believed。







　　　　　But　there　is　one　thing　that　I　have　never　from　my　youth　up　been



able　to　understand。　　I　have　never　been　able　to　understand　where　people



got　the　idea　that　democracy　was　in　some　way　opposed　to　tradition。　



It　is　obvious　that　tradition　is　only　democracy　extended　through　time。　



It　is　trusting　to　a　consensus　of　common　human　voices　rather　than　to



some　isolated　or　arbitrary　record。　　The　man　who　quotes　some　German



historian　against　the　tradition　of　the　Catholic　Church；　for　instance；



is　strictly　appealing　to　aristocracy。　　He　is　appealing　to　the



superiority　of　one　expert　against　the　awful　authority　of　a　mob。　



It　is　quite　easy　to　see　why　a　legend　is　treated；　and　ought　to　be　treated；



more　respectfully　than　a　book　of　history。　　The　legend　is　generally



made　by　the　majority　of　people　in　the　village；　who　are　sane。　



The　book　is　generally　written　by　the　one　man　in　the　village　who　is　mad。　



Those　who　urge　against　tradition　that　men　in　the　past　were　ignorant



may　go　and　urge　it　at　the　Carlton　Club；　along　with　the　statement



that　voters　in　the　slums　are　ignorant。　　It　will　not　do　for　us。　



If　we　attach　great　importance　to　the　opinion　of　ordinary　men　in　great



unanimity　when　we　are　dealing　with　daily　matters；　there　is　no　reason



why　we　should　disregard　it　when　we　are　dealing　with　history　or　fable。　



Tradition　may　be　defined　as　an　extension　of　the　franchise。　



Tradition　means　giving　votes　to　the　most　obscure　of　all　classes；



our　ancestors。　　It　is　the　democracy　of　the　dead。　　Tradition　refuses



to　submit　to　the　small　and　arrogant　oligarchy　of　those　who　merely



happen　to　be　walking　about。　　All　democrats　object　to　men　being



disqualified　by　the　accident　of　birth；　tradition　objects　to　their



being　disqualified　by　the　accident　of　death。　　Democracy　tells　us



not　to　neglect　a　good　man's　opinion；　even　if　he　is　our　groom；



tradition　asks　us　not　to　neglect　a　good　man's　opinion；　even　if　he　is



our　father。　　I；　at　any　rate；　cannot　separate　the　two　ideas　of　democracy



and　tradition；　it　seems　evident　to　me　that　they　are　the　same　idea。　



We　will　have　the　dead　at　our　councils。　　The　ancient　Greeks　voted



by　stones；　these　shall　vote　by　tombstones。　　It　is　all　quite　regular



and　official；　for　most　tombstones；　like　most　ballot　papers；　are　marked



with　a　cross。







　　　　　I　have　first　to　say；　therefore；　that　if　I　have　had　a　bias；　it　was



always　a　bias　in　favour　of　democracy；　and　therefore　of　tradition。　



Before　we　come　to　any　theoretic　or　logical　beginnings　I　am　content



to　allow　for　that　personal　equation；　I　have　always　been　more



inclined　to　believe　the　ruck　of　hard…working　people　than　to　believe



that　special　and　troublesome　literary　class　to　which　I　belong。　



I　prefer　even　the　fancies　and　prejudices　of　the　people　who　see



life　from　the　inside　to　the　clearest　demonstrations　of　the　people



who　see　life　from　the　outside。　　I　would　always　trust　the　old　wives'



fables　against　the　old　maids'　facts。　　As　long　as　wit　is　mother　wit　it



can　be　as　wild　as　it　pleases。







　　　　　Now；　I　have　to　put　together　a　general　position；　and　I　pretend



to　no　training　in　such　things。　　I　propose　to　do　it；　therefore；



by　writing　down　one　after　another　the　three　or　four　fundamental



ideas　which　I　have　found　for　myself；　pretty　much　in　the　way



that　I　found　them。　　Then　I　shall　roughly　synthesise　them；



summing　up　my　personal　philosophy　or　natural　religion；　then　I



shall　describe　my　startling　discovery　that　the　whole　thing　had



been　discovered　before。　　It　had　been　discovered　by　Christianity。　



But　of　these　profound　persuasions　which　I　have　to　recount　in　order；



the　earliest　was　concerned　with　this　element　of　popular　tradition。　



And　without　the　foregoing　explanation　touching　tradition　and



democracy　I　could　hardly　make　my　mental　experience　clear。　　As　it　is；



I　do　not　know　whether　I　can　make　it　clear；　but　I　now　propose　to　try。







　　　　　My　first　and　last　philosophy；　that　which　I　believe　in　with



unbroken　certainty；　I　learnt　in　the　nursery。　　I　generally　learnt　it



from　a　nurse；　that　is；　from　the　solemn　and　star…appointed　priestess



at　once　of　democracy　and　tradition。　　The　things　I　believed　most　then；



the　things　I　believe　most　now；　are　the　things　called　fairy　tales。　



They　seem　to　me　to　be　the　entirely　reasonable　things。　　They　are



not　fantasies：　　compared　with　them　other　things　are　fantastic。　



Compared　with　them　religion　and　rationalism　are　both　abnormal；



though　religion　is　abnormally　right　and　rationalism　abnormally　wrong。　



Fairyland　is　nothing　but　the　sunny　country　of　common　sense。　



It　is　not　earth　that　judges　heaven；　but　heaven　that　judges　earth；



so　for　me　at　least　it　was　not　earth　that　criticised　elfland；



but　elfland　that　criticised　the　earth。　　I　knew　the　magic　beanstalk



before　I　had　tasted　beans；　I　was　sure　of　the　Man　in　the　Moon　before　I



was　certain　of　the　moon。　　This　was　at　one　with　all　popular　tradition。　



Modern　minor　poets　are　naturalists；　and　talk　about　the　bush　or　the　brook；



but　the　singers　of　the　old　epics　and　fables　were　supernaturalists；



and　talked　about　the　gods　of　brook　and　bush。　　That　is　what　the　moderns



mean　when　they　say　that　the　ancients　did　not　〃appreciate　Nature；〃



because　they　said　that　Nature　was　divine。　　Old　nurses　do　not



tell　children　about　the　grass；　but　about　the　fairies　that　dance



on　the　grass；　and　the　old　Greeks　could　not　see　the　trees　for



the　dryads。







　　　　　But　I　deal　here　with　what　ethic　and　philosophy　come　from　being



fed　on　fairy　tales。　　If　I　were　describing　them　in　detail　I　could



note　many　noble　and　healthy　principles　that　arise　from　them。　



There　is　the　chivalrous　lesson　of　〃Jack　the　Giant　Killer〃；　that　giants



should　be　killed　because　they　are　gigantic。　　It　is　a　manly　mutiny



against　pride　as　such。　　For　the　rebel　is　older　than　all　the　kingdoms；



and　the　Jacobin　has　more　tradition　than　the　Jacobite。　　There　is　the



lesson　of　〃Cinderella；〃　which　is　the　same　as　that　of　the　Magnificat



EXALTAVIT　HUMILES。　　There　is　the　great　lesson　of　〃Beauty　and　the　Beast〃；



that　a　thing　must　be　loved　BEFORE　it　is　loveable。　　There　is　the



terrible　allegory　of　the　〃Sleeping　Beauty；〃　which　tells　how　the　hum