heretics-第40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！
But we do； as a matter of fact； desire that his games with his children；
and his rides on his bicycle； and his meditations on the morning star
should pour something of their energy into our law…suit。 We do desire
that if he has gained any especial lung development from the bicycle；
or any bright and pleasing metaphors from the morning star； that the should
be placed at our disposal in that particular forensic controversy。
In a word； we are very glad that he is an ordinary man； since that
may help him to be an exceptional lawyer。
Whistler never ceased to be an artist。 As Mr。 Max Beerbohm pointed
out in one of his extraordinarily sensible and sincere critiques；
Whistler really regarded Whistler as his greatest work of art。
The white lock； the single eyeglass； the remarkable hat
these were much dearer to him than any nocturnes or arrangements
that he ever threw off。 He could throw off the nocturnes；
for some mysterious reason he could not throw off the hat。
He never threw off from himself that disproportionate accumulation
of aestheticism which is the burden of the amateur。
It need hardly be said that this is the real explanation of the thing
which has puzzled so many dilettante critics； the problem of the extreme
ordinariness of the behaviour of so many great geniuses in history。
Their behaviour was so ordinary that it was not recorded；
hence it was so ordinary that it seemed mysterious。 Hence people say
that Bacon wrote Shakespeare。 The modern artistic temperament cannot
understand how a man who could write such lyrics as Shakespeare wrote；
could be as keen as Shakespeare was on business transactions in a
little town in Warwickshire。 The explanation is simple enough；
it is that Shakespeare had a real lyrical impulse； wrote a real lyric；
and so got rid of the impulse and went about his business。
Being an artist did not prevent him from being an ordinary man；
any more than being a sleeper at night or being a diner at dinner
prevented him from being an ordinary man。
All very great teachers and leaders have had this habit
of assuming their point of view to be one which was human
and casual； one which would readily appeal to every passing man。
If a man is genuinely superior to his fellows the first thing
that he believes in is the equality of man。 We can see this；
for instance； in that strange and innocent rationality with which
Christ addressed any motley crowd that happened to stand about Him。
〃What man of you having a hundred sheep； and losing one； would not leave
the ninety and nine in the wilderness； and go after that which was lost？〃
Or； again； 〃What man of you if his son ask for bread will he give
him a stone； or if he ask for a fish will he give him a serpent？〃
This plainness； this almost prosaic camaraderie； is the note of all
very great minds。
To very great minds the things on which men agree are so immeasurably
more important than the things on which they differ； that the latter；
for all practical purposes； disappear。 They have too much in them
of an ancient laughter even to endure to discuss the difference
between the hats of two men who were both born of a woman；
or between the subtly varied cultures of two men who have both to die。
The first…rate great man is equal with other men； like Shakespeare。
The second…rate great man is on his knees to other men； like Whitman。
The third…rate great man is superior to other men； like Whistler。
XVIII The Fallacy of the Young Nation
To say that a man is an idealist is merely to say that he is
a man； but； nevertheless； it might be possible to effect some
valid distinction between one kind of idealist and another。
One possible distinction； for instance； could be effected by saying that
humanity is divided into conscious idealists and unconscious idealists。
In a similar way； humanity is divided into conscious ritualists and。
unconscious ritualists。 The curious thing is； in that example as
in others； that it is the conscious ritualism which is comparatively
simple； the unconscious ritual which is really heavy and complicated。
The ritual which is comparatively rude and straightforward is
the ritual which people call 〃ritualistic。〃 It consists of plain
things like bread and wine and fire； and men falling on their faces。
But the ritual which is really complex； and many coloured； and elaborate；
and needlessly formal； is the ritual which people enact without
knowing it。 It consists not of plain things like wine and fire；
but of really peculiar； and local； and exceptional； and ingenious things
things like door…mats； and door…knockers； and electric bells；
and silk hats； and white ties； and shiny cards； and confetti。
The truth is that the modern man scarcely ever gets back to very old
and simple things except when he is performing some religious mummery。
The modern man can hardly get away from ritual except by entering
a ritualistic church。 In the case of these old and mystical
formalities we can at least say that the ritual is not mere ritual；
that the symbols employed are in most cases symbols which belong to a
primary human poetry。 The most ferocious opponent of the Christian
ceremonials must admit that if Catholicism had not instituted
the bread and wine； somebody else would most probably have done so。
Any one with a poetical instinct will admit that to the ordinary
human instinct bread symbolizes something which cannot very easily
be symbolized otherwise； that wine； to the ordinary human instinct；
symbolizes something which cannot very easily be symbolized otherwise。
But white ties in the evening are ritual； and nothing else but ritual。
No one would pretend that white ties in the evening are primary
and poetical。 Nobody would maintain that the ordinary human instinct
would in any age or country tend to symbolize the idea of evening
by a white necktie。 Rather； the ordinary human instinct would；
I imagine； tend to symbolize evening by cravats with some of the colours
of the sunset； not white neckties； but tawny or crimson neckties
neckties of purple or olive； or some darkened gold。 Mr。 J。 A。 Kensit；
for example； is under the impression that he is not a ritualist。
But the daily life of Mr。 J。 A。 Kensit； like that of any ordinary
modern man； is； as a matter of fact； one continual and compressed
catalogue of mystical mummery and flummery。 To take one instance
out of an inevitable hundred： I imagine that Mr。 Kensit takes
off his hat to a lady； and what can be more solemn and absurd；
considered in the abstract； than； symbolizing the existence of the other
sex by taking off a portion of your clothing and waving it in the air？
This； I repeat； is not a natural and primitive symbol； like fire or food。
A man might just as well have to take off his waistcoat to a lady；
and if a man； by the social ritual of his civilization； had to take off
his waistcoat to a lady； every chivalrous and sensible man would take
off his waistcoat to a lady。 In short； Mr。 Kensit； and those who agree
with him； may think； and quite sincerely think； that men give too
much incense and ceremonial to their adoration of the other world。
But nobody thinks that he can give too much incense and ceremonial
to the adoration of this world。 All men； then； are ritualists； but are
either conscious or unconscious ritualists。 The conscious ritualists
are generally satisfied with a few very simple and elementary signs；
the unconscious ritualists are not satisfied with anything short
