heretics-第32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！





XV　On　Smart　Novelists　and　the　Smart　Set











In　one　sense；　at　any　rate；　it　is　more　valuable　to　read　bad　literature



than　good　literature。　　Good　literature　may　tell　us　the　mind



of　one　man；　but　bad　literature　may　tell　us　the　mind　of　many　men。



A　good　novel　tells　us　the　truth　about　its　hero；　but　a　bad　novel



tells　us　the　truth　about　its　author。　　It　does　much　more　than　that；



it　tells　us　the　truth　about　its　readers；　and；　oddly　enough；



it　tells　us　this　all　the　more　the　more　cynical　and　immoral



be　the　motive　of　its　manufacture。　　The　more　dishonest　a　book



is　as　a　book　the　more　honest　it　is　as　a　public　document。



A　sincere　novel　exhibits　the　simplicity　of　one　particular　man；



an　insincere　novel　exhibits　the　simplicity　of　mankind。



The　pedantic　decisions　and　definable　readjustments　of　man



may　be　found　in　scrolls　and　statute　books　and　scriptures；



but　men's　basic　assumptions　and　everlasting　energies　are　to　be



found　in　penny　dreadfuls　and　halfpenny　novelettes。　　Thus　a　man；



like　many　men　of　real　culture　in　our　day；　might　learn　from　good



literature　nothing　except　the　power　to　appreciate　good　literature。



But　from　bad　literature　he　might　learn　to　govern　empires　and　look



over　the　map　of　mankind。







There　is　one　rather　interesting　example　of　this　state　of　things



in　which　the　weaker　literature　is　really　the　stronger　and　the　stronger



the　weaker。　　It　is　the　case　of　what　may　be　called；　for　the　sake



of　an　approximate　description；　the　literature　of　aristocracy；



or；　if　you　prefer　the　description；　the　literature　of　snobbishness。



Now　if　any　one　wishes　to　find　a　really　effective　and　comprehensible



and　permanent　case　for　aristocracy　well　and　sincerely　stated；



let　him　read；　not　the　modern　philosophical　conservatives；



not　even　Nietzsche；　let　him　read　the　Bow　Bells　Novelettes。



Of　the　case　of　Nietzsche　I　am　confessedly　more　doubtful。



Nietzsche　and　the　Bow　Bells　Novelettes　have　both　obviously



the　same　fundamental　character；　they　both　worship　the　tall　man



with　curling　moustaches　and　herculean　bodily　power；　and　they　both



worship　him　in　a　manner　which　is　somewhat　feminine　and　hysterical。



Even　here；　however；　the　Novelette　easily　maintains　its



philosophical　superiority；　because　it　does　attribute　to　the　strong



man　those　virtues　which　do　commonly　belong　to　him；　such　virtues



as　laziness　and　kindliness　and　a　rather　reckless　benevolence；



and　a　great　dislike　of　hurting　the　weak。　　Nietzsche；　on　the　other　hand；



attributes　to　the　strong　man　that　scorn　against　weakness　which



only　exists　among　invalids。　　It　is　not；　however；　of　the　secondary



merits　of　the　great　German　philosopher；　but　of　the　primary　merits



of　the　Bow　Bells　Novelettes；　that　it　is　my　present　affair　to　speak。



The　picture　of　aristocracy　in　the　popular　sentimental　novelette　seems



to　me　very　satisfactory　as　a　permanent　political　and　philosophical　guide。



It　may　be　inaccurate　about　details　such　as　the　title　by　which　a　baronet



is　addressed　or　the　width　of　a　mountain　chasm　which　a　baronet　can



conveniently　leap；　but　it　is　not　a　bad　description　of　the　general



idea　and　intention　of　aristocracy　as　they　exist　in　human　affairs。



The　essential　dream　of　aristocracy　is　magnificence　and　valour；



and　if　the　Family　Herald　Supplement　sometimes　distorts　or　exaggerates



these　things；　at　least；　it　does　not　fall　short　in　them。



It　never　errs　by　making　the　mountain　chasm　too　narrow　or　the　title



of　the　baronet　insufficiently　impressive。　　But　above　this



sane　reliable　old　literature　of　snobbishness　there　has　arisen



in　our　time　another　kind　of　literature　of　snobbishness　which；



with　its　much　higher　pretensions；　seems　to　me　worthy　of　very　much



less　respect。　　Incidentally　（if　that　matters）；　it　is　much



better　literature。　　But　it　is　immeasurably　worse　philosophy；



immeasurably　worse　ethics　and　politics；　immeasurably　worse　vital



rendering　of　aristocracy　and　humanity　as　they　really　are。



From　such　books　as　those　of　which　I　wish　now　to　speak　we　can



discover　what　a　clever　man　can　do　with　the　idea　of　aristocracy。



But　from　the　Family　Herald　Supplement　literature　we　can　learn



what　the　idea　of　aristocracy　can　do　with　a　man　who　is　not　clever。



And　when　we　know　that　we　know　English　history。







This　new　aristocratic　fiction　must　have　caught　the　attention　of



everybody　who　has　read　the　best　fiction　for　the　last　fifteen　years。



It　is　that　genuine　or　alleged　literature　of　the　Smart　Set　which



represents　that　set　as　distinguished；　not　only　by　smart　dresses；



but　by　smart　sayings。　　To　the　bad　baronet；　to　the　good　baronet；



to　the　romantic　and　misunderstood　baronet　who　is　supposed　to　be　a



bad　baronet；　but　is　a　good　baronet；　this　school　has　added　a　conception



undreamed　of　in　the　former　yearsthe　conception　of　an　amusing　baronet。



The　aristocrat　is　not　merely　to　be　taller　than　mortal　men



and　stronger　and　handsomer；　he　is　also　to　be　more　witty。



He　is　the　long　man　with　the　short　epigram。　　Many　eminent；



and　deservedly　eminent；　modern　novelists　must　accept　some



responsibility　for　having　supported　this　worst　form　of　snobbishness



an　intellectual　snobbishness。　　The　talented　author　of　〃Dodo〃　is



responsible　for　having　in　some　sense　created　the　fashion　as　a　fashion。



Mr。　Hichens；　in　the　〃Green　Carnation；〃　reaffirmed　the　strange　idea



that　young　noblemen　talk　well；　though　his　case　had　some　vague



biographical　foundation；　and　in　consequence　an　excuse。　　Mrs。　Craigie



is　considerably　guilty　in　the　matter；　although；　or　rather　because；



she　has　combined　the　aristocratic　note　with　a　note　of　some　moral



and　even　religious　sincerity。　　When　you　are　saving　a　man's　soul；



even　in　a　novel；　it　is　indecent　to　mention　that　he　is　a　gentleman。



Nor　can　blame　in　this　matter　be　altogether　removed　from　a　man　of　much



greater　ability；　and　a　man　who　has　proved　his　possession　of　the　highest



of　human　instinct；　the　romantic　instinctI　mean　Mr。　Anthony　Hope。



In　a　galloping；　impossible　melodrama　like　〃The　Prisoner　of　Zenda；〃



the　blood　of　kings　fanned　an　excellent　fantastic　thread　or　theme。



But　the　blood　of　kings　is　not　a　thing　that　can　be　taken　seriously。



And　when；　for　example；　Mr。　Hope　devotes　so　much　serious　and　sympathetic



study　to　the　man　called　Tristram　of　Blent；　a　man　who　throughout　burning



boyhood　thought　of　nothing　but　a　silly　old　estate；　we　feel　even　in



Mr。　Hope　the　hint　of　this　excessive　concern　about　the　oligarchic　idea。



It　is　hard　for　any　ordinary　person　to　feel　so　much　interest　in　a



young　man　whose　whole　aim　is　to　own　the　house　of　Blent　at　the　time



when　every　other　young　man　is　owning　the　stars。







Mr。　Hope；　however；　is　a　very　mild　case；　and　in　him　there　is　not



only　an　element　of　romance；　but　also　a　fine　element　of　irony



which　warns　us　against　taking　all　this　elegance　too　seriously。



Above　all；　he　shows　his　sense　in　not　making　his　noblemen　so　incredibly



equipped　with　impromptu　repartee。　　This　habit　of　insisting　on



the　wit　of　the　wealthier　classes　is　the　last　and　most　servile



of　all　the　servilities。　　It　is；　as　I　have　said；　immeasurably　more



contemptible　than　the　snobbishness　of　the　novelette　which　describes



the　nobleman　as　smiling　like　an　Apollo　or　riding　a　mad　elephant。



These　may　be　exaggerations　of　beauty　and　courage；　but　beauty　and　courage



are　the　unconscious　ideals　of　aristocrats；　even　of　stupid　aristocrats。







The　nobleman　of　the　novelette　may　not　be　sketched　with　any　very　close



or　conscientious　attention　to　the　daily　habits　of　noblemen。　　But　he　is



something　more　important　than　a　reality；　he　is　a　practical　ideal。



The　gentleman　of　fiction　may　not　copy　the　gentleman　of　real　life；



but　the　gentle