heretics-第40节
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！
We should say； 〃A woman has fallen into the water。〃 We should not say；
〃A highly educated woman has fallen into the water。〃 Nobody would say；
〃There are the remains of a clear thinker in your back garden。〃
Nobody would say； 〃Unless you hurry up and stop him； a man
with a very fine ear for music will have jumped off that cliff。〃
But this emotion； which all of us have in connection with such
things as birth and death； is to some people native and constant
at all ordinary times and in all ordinary places。 It was native
to St。 Francis of Assisi。 It was native to Walt Whitman。
In this strange and splendid degree it cannot be expected；
perhaps； to pervade a whole commonwealth or a whole civilization；
but one commonwealth may have it much more than another commonwealth；
one civilization much more than another civilization。
No community； perhaps； ever had it so much as the early Franciscans。
No community； perhaps； ever had it so little as ours。
Everything in our age has； when carefully examined； this fundamentally
undemocratic quality。 In religion and morals we should admit；
in the abstract； that the sins of the educated classes were as great as；
or perhaps greater than； the sins of the poor and ignorant。
But in practice the great difference between the mediaeval
ethics and ours is that ours concentrate attention on the sins
which are the sins of the ignorant； and practically deny that
the sins which are the sins of the educated are sins at all。
We are always talking about the sin of intemperate drinking；
because it is quite obvious that the poor have it more than the rich。
But we are always denying that there is any such thing as the sin of pride；
because it would be quite obvious that the rich have it more than the poor。
We are always ready to make a saint or prophet of the educated man
who goes into cottages to give a little kindly advice to the uneducated。
But the medieval idea of a saint or prophet was something quite different。
The mediaeval saint or prophet was an uneducated man who walked
into grand houses to give a little kindly advice to the educated。
The old tyrants had enough insolence to despoil the poor；
but they had not enough insolence to preach to them。
It was the gentleman who oppressed the slums； but it was the slums
that admonished the gentleman。 And just as we are undemocratic
in faith and morals； so we are； by the very nature of our attitude
in such matters； undemocratic in the tone of our practical politics。
It is a sufficient proof that we are not an essentially democratic
state that we are always wondering what we shall do with the poor。
If we were democrats； we should be wondering what the poor will do with us。
With us the governing class is always saying to itself； 〃What laws shall
we make？〃 In a purely democratic state it would be always saying；
〃What laws can we obey？〃 A purely democratic state perhaps there
has never been。 But even the feudal ages were in practice thus
far democratic； that every feudal potentate knew that any laws
which he made would in all probability return upon himself。
His feathers might be cut off for breaking a sumptuary law。
His head might be cut off for high treason。 But the modern laws are almost
always laws made to affect the governed class； but not the governing。
We have public…house licensing laws； but not sumptuary laws。
That is to say； we have laws against the festivity and hospitality of
the poor； but no laws against the festivity and hospitality of the rich。
We have laws against blasphemythat is； against a kind of coarse
and offensive speaking in which nobody but a rough and obscure man
would be likely to indulge。 But we have no laws against heresy
that is； against the intellectual poisoning of the whole people；
in which only a prosperous and prominent man would be likely to
be successful。 The evil of aristocracy is not that it necessarily
leads to the infliction of bad things or the suffering of sad ones；
the evil of aristocracy is that it places everything in the hands
of a class of people who can always inflict what they can never suffer。
Whether what they inflict is； in their intention； good or bad；
they become equally frivolous。 The case against the governing class
of modern England is not in the least that it is selfish； if you like；
you may call the English oligarchs too fantastically unselfish。
The case against them simply is that when they legislate for all men；
they always omit themselves。
We are undemocratic； then； in our religion； as is proved by our
efforts to 〃raise〃 the poor。 We are undemocratic in our government；
as is proved by our innocent attempt to govern them well。
But above all we are undemocratic in our literature； as is
proved by the torrent of novels about the poor and serious
studies of the poor which pour from our publishers every month。
And the more 〃modern〃 the book is the more certain it is to be
devoid of democratic sentiment。
A poor man is a man who has not got much money。 This may seem
a simple and unnecessary description； but in the face of a great
mass of modern fact and fiction； it seems very necessary indeed；
most of our realists and sociologists talk about a poor man as if
he were an octopus or an alligator。 There is no more need to study
the psychology of poverty than to study the psychology of bad temper；
or the psychology of vanity； or the psychology of animal spirits。
A man ought to know something of the emotions of an insulted man；
not by being insulted； but simply by being a man。 And he ought to know
something of the emotions of a poor man； not by being poor； but simply
by being a man。 Therefore； in any writer who is describing poverty；
my first objection to him will be that he has studied his subject。
A democrat would have imagined it。
A great many hard things have been said about religious slumming
and political or social slumming； but surely the most despicable
of all is artistic slumming。 The religious teacher is at least
supposed to be interested in the costermonger because he is a man；
the politician is in some dim and perverted sense interested in
the costermonger because he is a citizen； it is only the wretched
writer who is interested in the costermonger merely because he is
a costermonger。 Nevertheless； so long as he is merely seeking impressions；
or in other words copy； his trade； though dull； is honest。
But when he endeavours to represent that he is describing
the spiritual core of a costermonger； his dim vices and his
delicate virtues； then we must object that his claim is preposterous；
we must remind him that he is a journalist and nothing else。
He has far less psychological authority even than the foolish missionary。
For he is in the literal and derivative sense a journalist；
while the missionary is an eternalist。 The missionary at least
pretends to have a version of the man's lot for all time；
the journalist only pretends to have a version of it from day to day。
The missionary comes to tell the poor man that he is in the same
condition with all men。 The journalist comes to tell other people
how different the poor man is from everybody else。
If the modern novels about the slums； such as novels of Mr。 Arthur
Morrison； or the exceedingly able novels of Mr。 Somerset Maugham；
are intended to be sensational； I can only say that that is a noble
and reasonable object； and that they attain it。 A sensation；
a shock to the imagination； like the contact with cold water；
is always a good and exhilarating thing； and； undoubtedly； men will
always seek this sensation （among other forms） in the form of the study
of the strange antics of remote or alien peoples。 In the twelfth century
men obtained this sensation by reading about dog…headed men in Africa。
In the twentieth century they obtained it by reading about pig…headed
Boers in Africa。 The men of the twentieth century were certainly；
it must be admitted； somewhat the more credulous of the two。
For it is not recorded of the men in the twelfth century that they
organized a sanguinary crusade solely for the purpose of altering
the singular formation of the heads of the Africans。 But it may be；
and it may even legitimately be； that since all these monsters have faded
from the popular mythology； it is necessary to have in our fiction
the image of the horrible and hairy East…ender； merely to keep alive
in us a fearful and childlike wonder at exte
