the soul of man-第6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！



France；　is　the　formal　recognition　of　an　Academy　of　Letters；　and

fortunately　make　the　establishment　of　such　an　institution　quite

unnecessary　in　England。　　Of　course；　the　public　are　very　reckless　in

their　use　of　the　word。　　That　they　should　have　called　Wordsworth　an

immoral　poet；　was　only　to　be　expected。　　Wordsworth　was　a　poet。　　But

that　they　should　have　called　Charles　Kingsley　an　immoral　novelist

is　extraordinary。　　Kingsley's　prose　was　not　of　a　very　fine　quality。

Still；　there　is　the　word；　and　they　use　it　as　best　they　can。　　An

artist　is；　of　course；　not　disturbed　by　it。　　The　true　artist　is　a

man　who　believes　absolutely　in　himself；　because　he　is　absolutely

himself。　　But　I　can　fancy　that　if　an　artist　produced　a　work　of　art

in　England　that　immediately　on　its　appearance　was　recognised　by　the

public；　through　their　medium；　which　is　the　public　press；　as　a　work

that　was　quite　intelligible　and　highly　moral；　he　would　begin　to

seriously　question　whether　in　its　creation　he　had　really　been

himself　at　all；　and　consequently　whether　the　work　was　not　quite

unworthy　of　him；　and　either　of　a　thoroughly　second…rate　order；　or

of　no　artistic　value　whatsoever。



Perhaps；　however；　I　have　wronged　the　public　in　limiting　them　to

such　words　as　'immoral；'　'unintelligible；'　'exotic；'　and

'unhealthy。'　　There　is　one　other　word　that　they　use。　　That　word　is

'morbid。'　　They　do　not　use　it　often。　　The　meaning　of　the　word　is　so

simple　that　they　are　afraid　of　using　it。　　Still；　they　use　it

sometimes；　and；　now　and　then；　one　comes　across　it　in　popular

newspapers。　　It　is；　of　course；　a　ridiculous　word　to　apply　to　a　work

of　art。　　For　what　is　morbidity　but　a　mood　of　emotion　or　a　mode　of

thought　that　one　cannot　express？　　The　public　are　all　morbid；

because　the　public　can　never　find　expression　for　anything。　　The

artist　is　never　morbid。　　He　expresses　everything。　　He　stands

outside　his　subject；　and　through　its　medium　produces　incomparable

and　artistic　effects。　　To　call　an　artist　morbid　because　he　deals

with　morbidity　as　his　subject…matter　is　as　silly　as　if　one　called

Shakespeare　mad　because　he　wrote　'King　Lear。'



On　the　whole；　an　artist　in　England　gains　something　by　being

attacked。　　His　individuality　is　intensified。　　He　becomes　more

completely　himself。　　Of　course；　the　attacks　are　very　gross；　very

impertinent；　and　very　contemptible。　　But　then　no　artist　expects

grace　from　the　vulgar　mind；　or　style　from　the　suburban　intellect。

Vulgarity　and　stupidity　are　two　very　vivid　facts　in　modern　life。

One　regrets　them；　naturally。　　But　there　they　are。　　They　are

subjects　for　study；　like　everything　else。　　And　it　is　only　fair　to

state；　with　regard　to　modern　journalists；　that　they　always

apologise　to　one　in　private　for　what　they　have　written　against　one

in　public。



Within　the　last　few　years　two　other　adjectives；　it　may　be

mentioned；　have　been　added　to　the　very　limited　vocabulary　of　art…

abuse　that　is　at　the　disposal　of　the　public。　　One　is　the　word

'unhealthy；'　the　other　is　the　word　'exotic。'　　The　latter　merely

expresses　the　rage　of　the　momentary　mushroom　against　the　immortal；

entrancing；　and　exquisitely　lovely　orchid。　　It　is　a　tribute；　but　a

tribute　of　no　importance。　　The　word　'unhealthy；'　however；　admits　of

analysis。　　It　is　a　rather　interesting　word。　　In　fact；　it　is　so

interesting　that　the　people　who　use　it　do　not　know　what　it　means。



What　does　it　mean？　　What　is　a　healthy；　or　an　unhealthy　work　of　art？

All　terms　that　one　applies　to　a　work　of　art；　provided　that　one

applies　them　rationally；　have　reference　to　either　its　style　or　its

subject；　or　to　both　together。　　From　the　point　of　view　of　style；　a

healthy　work　of　art　is　one　whose　style　recognises　the　beauty　of　the

material　it　employs；　be　that　material　one　of　words　or　of　bronze；　of

colour　or　of　ivory；　and　uses　that　beauty　as　a　factor　in　producing

the　aesthetic　effect。　　From　the　point　of　view　of　subject；　a　healthy

work　of　art　is　one　the　choice　of　whose　subject　is　conditioned　by

the　temperament　of　the　artist；　and　comes　directly　out　of　it。　　In

fine；　a　healthy　work　of　art　is　one　that　has　both　perfection　and

personality。　　Of　course；　form　and　substance　cannot　be　separated　in

a　work　of　art；　they　are　always　one。　　But　for　purposes　of　analysis；

and　setting　the　wholeness　of　aesthetic　impression　aside　for　a

moment；　we　can　intellectually　so　separate　them。　　An　unhealthy　work

of　art；　on　the　other　hand；　is　a　work　whose　style　is　obvious；　old…

fashioned；　and　common；　and　whose　subject　is　deliberately　chosen；

not　because　the　artist　has　any　pleasure　in　it；　but　because　he

thinks　that　the　public　will　pay　him　for　it。　　In　fact；　the　popular

novel　that　the　public　calls　healthy　is　always　a　thoroughly

unhealthy　production；　and　what　the　public　call　an　unhealthy　novel

is　always　a　beautiful　and　healthy　work　of　art。



I　need　hardly　say　that　I　am　not；　for　a　single　moment；　complaining

that　the　public　and　the　public　press　misuse　these　words。　　I　do　not

see　how；　with　their　lack　of　comprehension　of　what　Art　is；　they

could　possibly　use　them　in　the　proper　sense。　　I　am　merely　pointing

out　the　misuse；　and　as　for　the　origin　of　the　misuse　and　the　meaning

that　lies　behind　it　all；　the　explanation　is　very　simple。　　It　comes

from　the　barbarous　conception　of　authority。　　It　comes　from　the

natural　inability　of　a　community　corrupted　by　authority　to

understand　or　appreciate　Individualism。　　In　a　word；　it　comes　from

that　monstrous　and　ignorant　thing　that　is　called　Public　Opinion；

which；　bad　and　well…meaning　as　it　is　when　it　tries　to　control

action；　is　infamous　and　of　evil　meaning　when　it　tries　to　control

Thought　or　Art。



Indeed；　there　is　much　more　to　be　said　in　favour　of　the　physical

force　of　the　public　than　there　is　in　favour　of　the　public's

opinion。　　The　former　may　be　fine。　　The　latter　must　be　foolish。　　It

is　often　said　that　force　is　no　argument。　　That；　however；　entirely

depends　on　what　one　wants　to　prove。　　Many　of　the　most　important

problems　of　the　last　few　centuries；　such　as　the　continuance　of

personal　government　in　England；　or　of　feudalism　in　France；　have

been　solved　entirely　by　means　of　physical　force。　　The　very　violence

of　a　revolution　may　make　the　public　grand　and　splendid　for　a

moment。　　It　was　a　fatal　day　when　the　public　discovered　that　the　pen

is　mightier　than　the　paving…stone；　and　can　be　made　as　offensive　as

the　brickbat。　　They　at　once　sought　for　the　journalist；　found　him；

developed　him；　and　made　him　their　industrious　and　well…paid

servant。　　It　is　greatly　to　be　regretted；　for　both　their　sakes。

Behind　the　barricade　there　may　be　much　that　is　noble　and　heroic。

But　what　is　there　behind　the　leading…article　but　prejudice；

stupidity；　cant；　and　twaddle？　　And　when　these　four　are　joined

together　they　make　a　terrible　force；　and　constitute　the　new

authority。



In　old　days　men　had　the　rack。　　Now　they　have　the　press。　　That　is　an

improvement　certainly。　　But　still　it　is　very　bad；　and　wrong；　and

demoralising。　　Somebody　…　was　it　Burke？　…　called　journalism　the

fourth　estate。　　That　was　true　at　the　time；　no　doubt。　　But　at　the

present　moment　it　really　is　the　only　estate。　　It　has　eaten　up　the

other　three。　　The　Lords　Temporal　say　nothing；　the　Lords　Spiritual

have　nothing　to　say；　and　the　House　of　Commons　has　nothing　to　say

and　says　it。　　We　are　dominated　by　Journalism。　　In　America　the

President　reigns　for　four　years；　and　Journalism　governs　for　ever

and　ever。　　Fortunately　in　America　Journalism　has　carried　its

authority　to　the　grossest　and　most　brutal　extreme。　　As　a　natural

consequence　it　has　begun　to　create　a　spirit　of　revolt。　　People　are

amused　by　it；　or　disgusted　by　it；　according　to　their　temperaments。

But　it　is　no　longer　the　real　force　it　was。　　It　is　not　seriously

treated。　　In　England；　Journalism；　not；　except　in　a　few　well…known

instances；　having　been　carried　to　such　excesses　of　brutality；　is

still　a　great　factor；　a　really　remarkable　power。　　The　tyranny　that

it　proposes　to　exercise　over　people's　private　lives　seems　to　me　to

be　quite　extraordinary。　　The　fact　is；　that　the　public　have　an

insatiable　curiosity　to　know　everything；　except　what　is　worth

knowing。　　Journalism；　conscious　of　this；　and　having　tradesman…like

habits；　supplies　their　demands。　　In　centuries　before　ours　the

public　nailed　the　ears　of　journalists　to　the　pump。　　That　was　quite

hideous。　　In　this　century　journalists　have　nailed　their　own　ears　to

the　keyhole。　　That　is　much　worse。　　And　what　aggravates　the　mischief

is　that　the　journalists　who　are　most　to　blame　are　not　the　amusing

journalists　who　write　for　what　are　called　Society　papers。　　The　harm

is　done　by　the　serious；　thoughtful；　earnest　journalists；　who

solemnly；　as　they　are　doing　at　present；　will　drag　before　the　eyes

of　the　public　some　incident　in　the　private　life　of　a　great

statesman；　of　a　man　who　is　a　leader　of　political　thought　as　he　is　a

creator　of　political　force；　and　invite　the　public　to　discuss　the

incident；　to　exercise　authority　in　the　matter；　to　give　their　views；

and　not　merely　to　give