As evidence of a lack of "book-learning" in the village, this might have

been insufficient, had it stood alone. But it did not. The misbehaviour

of the boys at the night-school has been mentioned. Being a member of

the school managing committee, I went in to the school occasionally, and

what I saw left me satisfied that a large part of the master's

difficulty arose from the unfamiliarity of the scholars with their own

language. That initial ignorance blocked the road to science even more

completely than, in the Entertainment Club, it did to art. "The Science

of Horticulture" was the subject of the lesson on one dismal evening,

this being the likeliest of some half-dozen "practical sciences"

prescribed for village choice by the educational authority at Whitehall.

About twenty "students," ranging from sixteen to nineteen years old,

were--no, not puzzling over it: they were "putting in time" as

perfunctorily as they dared, making the lesson an excuse for being

present together in a warmed and lighted room. When I went in it was

near the close of the evening; new matter was being entered upon,

apparently as an introduction to the next week's lesson. I stood and

watched. The master called upon first one, then another, to read aloud a

sentence or two out of the textbook with which each was provided; and

one after another the boys stood up, shamefaced or dogged, to stumble

through sentences which seemed to convey absolutely no meaning to them.

If it had been only the hard words that floored them--such as

"cotyledon" and "dicotyledon"--I should not have been surprised; but

they blundered over the ordinary English, and had next to no sense of

the meaning of punctuation. I admit that probably they were not trying

to do their best; that they might have put on a little intentional

clumsiness, in the instinctive hope of escaping derision by being

thought waggish. But the pity of it was that they should need to protect

themselves so. They had not the rudimentary accomplishment: that was the

plain truth. They could not understand ordinary printed English.

Of science, of course, they were learning nothing. They may have taken

away from those lessons a few elementary scientific terms, and possibly

they got hold of the idea of the existence of some mysterious knowledge

that was not known in the village; but the advantage ended there. I

doubt if a single member of the class had begun to use his brain in a

scientific way, reasoning from cause to effect; I doubt if it dawned

upon one of them that there was such an unheard-of accomplishment to be

acquired. They were trying--if they were trying anything at all--to pick

up modern science in the folk manner, by rote, as though it were a thing

to be handed down by tradition. So at least I infer, not only from

watching this particular class then and on other occasions, but also

from the following circumstance.

At Christmastime in one of these winters a few of the boys of the

night-school went round the village, mumming. They performed the same

old piece that Mr. Hardy has described in "The Return of the

Native"--the same old piece that, as a little child, I witnessed years

ago in a real village; but it had degenerated lamentably. The boys said

that they had learnt it from an elder brother of one of them, and had

practised it in a shed; and at my request the leader consented to write

out the piece, and in due time he brought me his copy. I have mislaid

the thing, and write from memory; but I recall enough of it to affirm

that he had never understood, or even cared to fix a meaning to, the

words--or sounds, rather--which he and his companions had gabbled

through as they prowled around the kitchen clashing their wooden swords.

That St. George had become King William was natural enough; but what is

to be said of changing the Turkish Knight into the Turkey Snipe? That

was one of the "howlers" this youth perpetrated, amongst many others

less striking, perhaps, but not less instructive. The whole thing

showed plainly where the difficulty lay at the night-school. The

breaking up of the traditional life of the village had failed to supply

the boys either with the language or with the mental habits necessary

for living successfully under the new conditions. Some of these boys

were probably the sons of parents unable to read and write; none of them

came from families where those accomplishments were habitually practised

or much esteemed.

The argument, thus illustrated by the state of the boys, extends in its

application to practically the whole of the village. "Book-learning" had

been very unimportant to the peasant with his traditional lore, but it

would be hard to exaggerate the handicap against which the modern

labourer strives, for want of it. Look once more at his position. In the

new circumstance the man lives in an environment never dreamt of by the

peasant. Economic influences affecting him most closely come, as it

were, vibrating upon him from across the sea. Vast commercial and social

movements, unfelt in the valley under the old system, are altering all

its character; instead of being one of a group of villagers tolerably

independent of the rest of the world, he is entangled in a network of

economic forces as wide as the nation; and yet, to hold his own in this

new environment, he has no new guidance. Parochial customs and the

traditions of the village make up the chief part of his equipment.

But for national intercourse parochial customs and traditions are

almost worse than none at all--like a Babel of Tongues. National

standards have to be set up. We cannot, for instance, deal in Winchester

quarts and Cheshire acres, in long hundreds and baker's dozens; we have

no use for weights and measures that vary from county to county, or for

a token coinage that is only valid in one town or in one trade. But most

of all, for making our modern arrangements a standard English language

is so necessary that those who are unfamiliar with it can neither manage

their own affairs efficiently nor take their proper share in the

national life.

And this is the situation of the labourer to-day. The weakness of it,

moreover, is in almost daily evidence. One would have thought that at

least in a man's own parish and his own private concerns illiteracy

would be no disadvantage; yet, in fact, it hampers him on every side.

Whether he would join a benefit society, or obtain poor-law relief, or

insure the lives of his children, or bury his dead, or take up a small

holding, he finds that he must follow a nationalized or standardized

procedure, set forth in language which his forefathers never heard

spoken and never learned to read. Even in the things that are really of

the village the same conditions prevail. The slate-club is managed upon

lines as businesslike as those of the national benefit society. The

"Institute" has its secretary, and treasurer, and balance-sheet, and

printed rules; the very cricket club is controlled by resolutions

proposed and seconded at formal committee meetings, and duly entered in

minute-books. But all this is a new thing in the village, and no

guidance for it is to be found in the lingering peasant traditions.

To this day, therefore, the majority of my neighbours, whose ability for

the work they have been prepared to do proves them to be no fools, are,

nevertheless, pitiably helpless in the management of their own affairs.

Most disheartening it is, too, for those whose help they seek, to work

with them. In the cricket-club committee, on which I served for a year

or two, it was noticeable that the members, eager for proper

arrangements to be made, often sat tongue-tied and glum, incapable of

urging their views, so that only after the meeting had broken up and

they had begun talking with one another did one learn that the

resolutions which had been passed were not to their mind. Formalities

puzzled them--seemed to strike them as futilities. And so in other

matters besides cricket. A local builder--a man of blameless

integrity--had a curious experience. Somewhat against his wishes, he was

appointed treasurer of the village Lodge of Oddfellows; but when,

inheriting a considerable sum of money, he began to buy land and build

houses, nothing would persuade the illiterate members of the society

that he was not speculating with their funds. Audited accounts had no

meaning for them; possibly the fact that he was doing a service for no

pay struck them as suspicious; at any rate they murmured so openly that

he threw up his office. Whom they have got in his place, and whether

they are suspicious of him too, I do not know. My point is that, while

modern thrift obliges them to enter into these fellowships, they remain,

for mere want of book-learning, unable to help themselves, and dependent

on the aid of friends from the middle or employing classes. In other

words, the greater number of the Englishmen in the village have to stand

aside and see their own affairs controlled for them by outsiders.

This is so wholly the case in some matters that nobody ever dreams of

consulting the people who are chiefly concerned in them. In the

education of their children, for one thing, they have no voice at all.

It is administered in a standardized form by a committee of middle-class

people appointed in the neighbouring town, who carry out provisions

which originate from unapproachable permanent officials at Whitehall.

The County Council may modify the programme a little; His Majesty's

inspectors--strangers to the people, and ignorant of their needs--issue

fiats in the form of advice to the school teachers; and meanwhile the

parents of the children acquiesce, not always approving what is done,

but accepting it as if it were a law of fate that all such things must

be arranged over their heads by the classes who have book-learning.

And this customary attitude of waiting for what the "educated" may do

for them renders them apathetic where they might be, and where it is

highly important that they should be, reliant upon their own

initiative--I mean, in political action. The majority of the labourers

in the village have extremely crude ideas of representative government.

A candidate for Parliament is not, in their eyes, a servant whom they

may appoint to give voice to their own wishes; he is a "gentleman" who,

probably from motives of self-interest, comes to them as a sort of quack

doctor, with occult remedies, which they may have if they will vote for

him, and which might possibly do them good. Hence they hardly look upon

the Government as an instrument at all under the control of people like

themselves; they view it, rather, as a sort of benevolent tyranny, whose

constitution is no concern of theirs. Commons or Lords, Liberals or

Tories--what does it matter to the labourer which of them has the power,

so long as one or other will cast an occasional look in his direction,

and try to do something or other to help him? What they should do rests

with the politicians: it is their part to suggest, the labourer's to

acquiesce.

Such are some of the more obvious disabilities from which the cottage

people suffer, largely for want of book-learning. I think, however, that

they are beginning to be aware of the disadvantage, for, though they say

little about it, I have heard of several men getting their children to

teach them, in the evening, the lessons learnt at school during the day.

Certainly the old contempt for "book-learning" is dying out. And now and

then one hears the most ingenuous confessions of incompetence to

understand matters of admitted interest. An old woman, discussing

"Tariff Reform," said: "We sort o' people can't understand it for

ourselves. What we wants is for somebody to come and explain it to us.

And then," she added, "we dunno whether we dares believe what they

says." If you could hear one even of the better-taught labourers trying

to read out something from a newspaper, you would appreciate his

difficulties. He goes too slowly to get the sense; the end of a

paragraph is too far off from the beginning of it; the thread of the

argument is lost sight of. An allusion, a metaphor, a parenthesis, may

easily make nonsense of the whole thing to a reader who has never heard

of the subject alluded to, or of the images called up by the metaphor,

and whose mind is unaccustomed to those actions of pausing

circumspection which a parenthesis demands.

XIX

EMOTIONAL STARVATION

Remembering the tales which get into the papers now and then of riot

amongst the "high-spirited young gentlemen" at the Universities, I am a

little unwilling to say more about the unruliness of our village youths,

as though it were something peculiar to their rank of life. Yet it must

not be quite passed over. To be sure, not all the village lads, any more

than all undergraduates, are turbulent and mischievous; yet here, as at

Oxford, there is a minority who apparently think it manly to be

insubordinate and to give trouble, while here, just as there, the better

sense of the majority is too feeble to make up a public opinion which

the offenders would be afraid to defy. The disorder of the village lads

was noticeable long ago at the night-school; for example, on an evening

shortly after the "Khaki" election, when Mr. Brodrick (now Lord

Midleton) had been re-elected for this division. On that evening a

lecture on Norway, illustrated by lantern slides, could hardly be got

through owing to the liveliness of a few lads, who amused all their

comrades by letting off volleys of electioneering cries. I have

forgotten who the lecturer was, but I remember well how the shouts of

"Good old Brodrick!" often prevailed, so that one could not hear the

man's voice. Since then there have been more striking examples of the

same sort of vivacity. Not two winters ago the weekly meetings of a

"boys' club," which aimed only to help the village lads pass an evening

sensibly, had to be abandoned, owing to the impossible behaviour of the

members. One week I heard that they had run amok amongst the furniture

of the schoolroom where the meetings were held; on the next, they blew

out the lamps, and locked one of the organizers into the room for an

hour; and a week or two afterwards they piled window-curtains and

door-mats on to the fire, and nearly got the building ablaze. In short,

to judge from what was told me, there seems to have been little to

distinguish them from frolicsome undergraduates, save their

poverty-stricken clothes and their unaspirated speech. It is true they

kept their excesses within doors, but then, they had no influential

relatives to take their part against an interfering police force; and

moreover, most of them came to the meetings a little subdued by ten

hours or so of work at wage-earning. Still, their "high spirits" were in

evidence, uncontrolled--just as elsewhere--by any high sentiment. The

sense of personal responsibility for their actions, the power to

understand that there is such a thing as "playing the game" even towards

people in authority or towards the general public, seemed to be as

foreign to them as if they had never had to soil their hands with hard

work.

Whatever may be the case with others, in the village lads a merely

intellectual unpreparedness is doubtless partly accountable for this

behaviour. The villagers having had no previous experience of action in

groups, unless under compulsion like that of the railway-ganger or of

the schoolmaster with his cane, it is strange now to the boys to find

themselves at a school where there is no compulsion, but all is left to

their voluntary effort. And stranger still is the club. A formal

society, dependent wholly on the loyal co-operation of its members and

yet enforcing no obvious discipline upon them, is a novelty in village

life. The idea of it is an abstraction, and because the old-fashioned

half-peasant people fifty years ago never needed to think about

abstractions at all, it turns out now that no family habit of mind for

grasping such ideas has come down from them to their grandsons.

This mental inefficiency, however, is only a form--a definite form for

once--of a more vague but more prevalent backwardness. The fact is that

the old ideas of conduct in general are altogether too restricted for

the new requirements, so that the village life suffers throughout from a

sort of ethical starvation. I gladly admit that, for the day's work and

its hardships, the surviving sentiments in favour of industry, patience,

good-humour, and so on, still are strong; and I do not forget the

admirable spirit of the cottage women in particular; yet it is true that

for the wider experiences of modern life other sentiments or ideals, in

addition to those of the peasants, need development, and that progress

in them is behindhand in the village. What the misbehaviour of the

village boys illustrates in one direction may be seen in other

directions amongst the men and women and children.

Like other people, the cottagers have their emotional susceptibilities,

which, however, are either more robust than other people's or else more

sluggish. At any rate it takes more than a little to disturb them.

During last winter I heard of a man--certainly he was one of the older

sort, good at many an obsolete rural craft--who had had chilblains burst

on his fingers, and had sewn up the wounds himself with needle and

cotton. There is no suspicion of inhumanity against him, yet it seemed

to me that in fiercer times he would have made a willing torturer; and

other little incidents--all of them recent ones too--came back to my

mind when I heard of him. In one of these a servant-girl from the

village was concerned--a quiet and timid girl she was said to be; yet,

on her own initiative, and without consulting her mistress, she drowned

a stray cat which was trying to get a footing in the household. Again, I

myself heard and wondered at the happy prattle of two little girls--the

children, they, of a most conscientious man and woman--as they told of

the fun they had enjoyed, along with their father and mother, in

watching a dog worry a hedgehog. And yet it is plain enough that the

faculty for compassion and kindness is inborn in the villagers, so that

their susceptibilities might just as well be keen as blunt. In their

behaviour to their pets the gentle hands and the caressing voices

betoken a great natural aptitude for tenderness. And not to their pets

only. All one afternoon I heard, proceeding from a pig-stye, the voice

of an elderly man who was watching an ailing sow there. "_Come_ on, ol'

gal ... _come_ on, ol' gal," he said, over and over again in tireless

repetition, as sympathetically as if he were talking to a child. Where

the people fail in sensitiveness is from a want of imagination, as we

say, though we should say, rather, a want of suppleness in their ideas.

They can sympathize when their own dog or cat is suffering, because use

has wakened up their powers in that direction; but they do not abstract

the idea of suffering life and apply it to the tormented hedgehog,

because their ideas have not been practised upon imagined or

non-existent things in such a way as to become, as it were, a detached

power of understanding, generally applicable.

But is it to be wondered at if some unlovely features appear in the

village character? Or is it not rather a circumstance to give one

pause, that these commercially unsuccessful and socially neglected

people, whose large families the self-satisfied eugenist views with such

solemn misgivings, should be in the main so kindly, so generous, and

sometimes so lofty in their sentiments as in fact they are? With like

disadvantages, where are there any other people in the country who would

do so bravely? If it is clear that they miss a rich development of their

susceptibilities, a reason why is no less clear. I have just hinted at

it. The ample explanation is in the fact that they have hardly any

imaginary or non-existent subjects upon which to exercise emotional

sensibility for its own sake, so that it may grow strong and fine by

frequent practice; but they have to wait for some real thing to move

them--some distressful occurrence in the valley itself, like that

mentioned earlier in this book, when a man trimming a hedge all but

killed his own child, and a thrill of horror shuddered through the

cottages. Of matters like this the people talk with an excited

fascination, there being so little else to stir them. Instead of the

moving accident by flood or field, they have the squalid or merely

agonizing accident. Sickness amongst friends or neighbours affords

another topic upon which their emotion seeks exercise: they linger over

the discussion of it, talking in moaning tones instinctively intended to

stimulate feeling. Then there are police-court cases. Some man gets

drunk, and is fined; or cannot pay his rent, and is turned out of his

cottage; or misbehaves in such a way that he is sent to gaol. The talk

of it threads its swift way about the village--goes into intimate

details, too, relating how the culprit's wife "took on" when her man was

sentenced; or how his children suffer; or perhaps how the magistrates

bullied him, or how he insulted the prosecuting lawyer.

It is natural that the people should be greedy readers (when they can

read at all) of the sensational matter supplied by newspapers.

Earthquakes, railway disasters, floods, hurricanes, excite them not

really disagreeably. So, too, does it animate them to hear of prodigies

and freaks of Nature, as when, a little while ago, the papers told of a

man whose flesh turned "like marble," so that he could not bend his

limbs for fear lest they should snap. Anything to wonder at will serve;

anything about which they can exclaim. That feeling of the crowd when

fireworks call forth the fervent "_O-oh!_" of admiration, is the village

feeling which delights in portents of whatever kind. But nothing else is

quite so effectual to that end as are crimes of violence, and especially

murder. For, after all, it is the human element that counts; and these

descendants of peasants, having no fictitious means of acquainting

themselves with human passion and sentiment, such as novels and dramas

supply in such abundance to other people, turn with all the more

avidity to the unchosen and unprepared food furnished to their starving

faculties by contemporary crime.

There is, indeed, another side to their sensationalism which should be

noticed. I was a little startled some years ago by a scrap of

conversation between two women. The papers at that time were full of a

murder which had been committed in a village neighbouring this, the

young man accused of it being even then on his trial. It was in the

evidence that he had visited his home quite an hour after the time when

the deed must have been done, and these women were discussing that

point, one of them saying: "I don't believe _my_ boy would ha' come 'ome

that Sunday night if _he'd_ ha' done it." It was surprising to me to

hear a respectable mother speculate as to how her own son would behave

in such a case, or contemplate even the possibility of his being guilty

of murder; and I thought it all too practical a way of considering the

subject. But it revealed how appallingly real such things may be to

people who, as I tried to show farther back, have reason to feel a

little like an alien race under our middle-class law. Very often one may

discern this personal or practical point of view in their

sensationalism: they indulge it chiefly for the sake of excitement, but

with a side glance at the bearing which the issue may have upon their

own affairs. In a foul case which was dealt with under the Criminal Law

Amendment Act, large numbers of our cottage women flocked to the town

to hear the trial, attracted partly by the hope of sensation, of course,

but also very largely actuated by a sentiment of revenge against the

offender; for here the safety of their own young daughters was involved.

Change in the Village · 第 14 / 17 段