heretics-第33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！





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



but　the　gentleman　of　real　life　is　copying　the　gentleman　of　fiction。



He　may　not　be　particularly　good…looking；　but　he　would　rather　be



good…looking　than　anything　else；　he　may　not　have　ridden　on　a　mad　elephant；



but　he　rides　a　pony　as　far　as　possible　with　an　air　as　if　he　had。



And；　upon　the　whole；　the　upper　class　not　only　especially　desire



these　qualities　of　beauty　and　courage；　but　in　some　degree；



at　any　rate；　especially　possess　them。　　Thus　there　is　nothing　really



mean　or　sycophantic　about　the　popular　literature　which　makes　all　its



marquises　seven　feet　high。　　It　is　snobbish；　but　it　is　not　servile。



Its　exaggeration　is　based　on　an　exuberant　and　honest　admiration；



its　honest　admiration　is　based　upon　something　which　is　in　some　degree；



at　any　rate；　really　there。　　The　English　lower　classes　do　not



fear　the　English　upper　classes　in　the　least；　nobody　could。



They　simply　and　freely　and　sentimentally　worship　them。



The　strength　of　the　aristocracy　is　not　in　the　aristocracy　at　all；



it　is　in　the　slums。　　It　is　not　in　the　House　of　Lords；　it　is　not



in　the　Civil　Service；　it　is　not　in　the　Government　offices；　it　is　not



even　in　the　huge　and　disproportionate　monopoly　of　the　English　land。



It　is　in　a　certain　spirit。　　It　is　in　the　fact　that　when　a　navvy



wishes　to　praise　a　man；　it　comes　readily　to　his　tongue　to　say



that　he　has　behaved　like　a　gentleman。　　From　a　democratic　point



of　view　he　might　as　well　say　that　he　had　behaved　like　a　viscount。



The　oligarchic　character　of　the　modern　English　commonwealth　does　not　rest；



like　many　oligarchies；　on　the　cruelty　of　the　rich　to　the　poor。



It　does　not　even　rest　on　the　kindness　of　the　rich　to　the　poor。



It　rests　on　the　perennial　and　unfailing　kindness　of　the　poor



to　the　rich。







The　snobbishness　of　bad　literature；　then；　is　not　servile；　but　the



snobbishness　of　good　literature　is　servile。　　The　old…fashioned　halfpenny



romance　where　the　duchesses　sparkled　with　diamonds　was　not　servile；



but　the　new　romance　where　they　sparkle　with　epigrams　is　servile。



For　in　thus　attributing　a　special　and　startling　degree　of　intellect



and　conversational　or　controversial　power　to　the　upper　classes；



we　are　attributing　something　which　is　not　especially　their　virtue



or　even　especially　their　aim。　　We　are；　in　the　words　of　Disraeli



（who；　being　a　genius　and　not　a　gentleman；　has　perhaps　primarily



to　answer　for　the　introduction　of　this　method　of　flattering



the　gentry）；　we　are　performing　the　essential　function　of　flattery



which　is　flattering　the　people　for　the　qualities　they　have　not　got。



Praise　may　be　gigantic　and　insane　without　having　any　quality



of　flattery　so　long　as　it　is　praise　of　something　that　is　noticeably



in　existence。　　A　man　may　say　that　a　giraffe's　head　strikes



the　stars；　or　that　a　whale　fills　the　German　Ocean；　and　still



be　only　in　a　rather　excited　state　about　a　favourite　animal。



But　when　he　begins　to　congratulate　the　giraffe　on　his　feathers；



and　the　whale　on　the　elegance　of　his　legs；　we　find　ourselves



confronted　with　that　social　element　which　we　call　flattery。



The　middle　and　lower　orders　of　London　can　sincerely；　though　not



perhaps　safely；　admire　the　health　and　grace　of　the　English　aristocracy。



And　this　for　the　very　simple　reason　that　the　aristocrats　are；



upon　the　whole；　more　healthy　and　graceful　than　the　poor。



But　they　cannot　honestly　admire　the　wit　of　the　aristocrats。



And　this　for　the　simple　reason　that　the　aristocrats　are　not　more　witty



than　the　poor；　but　a　very　great　deal　less　so。　　A　man　does　not　hear；



as　in　the　smart　novels；　these　gems　of　verbal　felicity　dropped　between



diplomatists　at　dinner。　　Where　he　really　does　hear　them　is　between



two　omnibus　conductors　in　a　block　in　Holborn。　　The　witty　peer　whose



impromptus　fill　the　books　of　Mrs。　Craigie　or　Miss　Fowler；　would；



as　a　matter　of　fact；　be　torn　to　shreds　in　the　art　of　conversation



by　the　first　boot…black　he　had　the　misfortune　to　fall　foul　of。



The　poor　are　merely　sentimental；　and　very　excusably　sentimental；



if　they　praise　the　gentleman　for　having　a　ready　hand　and　ready　money。



But　they　are　strictly　slaves　and　sycophants　if　they　praise　him



for　having　a　ready　tongue。　　For　that　they　have　far　more　themselves。







The　element　of　oligarchical　sentiment　in　these　novels；



however；　has；　I　think；　another　and　subtler　aspect；　an　aspect



more　difficult　to　understand　and　more　worth　understanding。



The　modern　gentleman；　particularly　the　modern　English　gentleman；



has　become　so　central　and　important　in　these　books；　and　through



them　in　the　whole　of　our　current　literature　and　our　current　mode



of　thought；　that　certain　qualities　of　his；　whether　original　or　recent；



essential　or　accidental；　have　altered　the　quality　of　our　English　comedy。



In　particular；　that　stoical　ideal；　absurdly　supposed　to　be



the　English　ideal；　has　stiffened　and　chilled　us。　　It　is　not



the　English　ideal；　but　it　is　to　some　extent　the　aristocratic　ideal；



or　it　may　be　only　the　ideal　of　aristocracy　in　its　autumn　or　decay。



The　gentleman　is　a　Stoic　because　he　is　a　sort　of　savage；



because　he　is　filled　with　a　great　elemental　fear　that　some　stranger



will　speak　to　him。　　That　is　why　a　third…class　carriage　is　a　community；



while　a　first…class　carriage　is　a　place　of　wild　hermits。



But　this　matter；　which　is　difficult；　I　may　be　permitted　to　approach



in　a　more　circuitous　way。







The　haunting　element　of　ineffectualness　which　runs　through　so　much



of　the　witty　and　epigrammatic　fiction　fashionable　during　the　last



eight　or　ten　years；　which　runs　through　such　works　of　a　real　though



varying　ingenuity　as　〃Dodo；〃　or　〃Concerning　Isabel　Carnaby；〃



or　even　〃Some　Emotions　and　a　Moral；〃　may　be　expressed　in　various　ways；



but　to　most　of　us　I　think　it　will　ultimately　amount　to　the　same　thing。



This　new　frivolity　is　inadequate　because　there　is　in　it　no　strong　sense



of　an　unuttered　joy。　　The　men　and　women　who　exchange　the　repartees



may　not　only　be　hating　each　other；　but　hating　even　themselves。



Any　one　of　them　might　be　bankrupt　that　day；　or　sentenced　to　be　shot



the　next。　　They　are　joking；　not　because　they　are　merry；　but　because



they　are　not；　out　of　the　emptiness　of　the　heart　the　mouth　speaketh。



Even　when　they　talk　pure　nonsense　it　is　a　careful　nonsensea　nonsense



of　which　they　are　economical；　or；　to　use　the　perfect　expression



of　Mr。　W。　S。　Gilbert　in　〃Patience；〃　it　is　such　〃precious　nonsense。〃



Even　when　they　become　light…headed　they　do　not　become　light…hearted。



All　those　who　have　read　anything　of　the　rationalism　of　the　moderns　know



that　their　Reason　is　a　sad　thing。　　But　even　their　unreason　is　sad。







The　causes　of　this　incapacity　are　also　not　very　difficult　to　indicate。



The　chief　of　all；　of　course；　is　that　miserable　fear　of　being　sentimental；



which　is　the　meanest　of　all　the　modern　terrorsmeaner　even　than



the　terror　which　produces　hygiene。　　Everywhere　the　robust　and



uproarious　humour　has　come　from　the　men　who　were　capable　not　merely



of　sentimentalism；　but　a　very　silly　sentimentalism。　　There　has　been



no　humour　so　robust　or　uproarious　as　that　of　the　sentimentalist



Steele　or　the　sentimentalist　Sterne　or　the　sentimentalist　Dickens。



These　creatures　who　wept　like　women　were　the　creatures　who　laughed



like　men。　　It　is　true　that　the　humour　of　Micawber　is　good　literature



and　that　the　pathos　of　little　Nell　is　bad。　　But　the　kind　of　man



who　had　the　courage　to　write　so　badly　in　the　one　case　is　the　kind



of　man　who　would　have　the　courage　to　write　so　well　in　the　other。



The　same　unconsciousness；　the　same　violent　innocence；　the　same



gigantes