"They are all there, the comrades, the radicals, the red ones, and

dreamers; people who are free because they own nothing. Poets,

philosophers, novelists, dramatists, artists, editors, agitators and

other idle and useless beings, they form a great galaxy in the New York

Ghetto. For several years, ever since I left New York, I had been

receiving instruction and inspiration from them through the medium of

the Yiddish and the Socialist press, where my own things often appeared

beside their spirited outpourings, and now I was overcome by an

overpowering desire to meet them again, talk matters over and fight it

all out. There is no sham about the East Side branch of the ancient and

most honorable order of Bohemians--the little changing, moving world

that is flowing with the milk of human kindness and the honey of

fraternal affections, where those who live may die and those who die may

live. Here among the East Side Bohemians people feel freely, act

independently, speak as they think and are not at all ashamed of their

feelings. They have courage. They wear their convictions in public. They

do as they please, whether that pleases everybody else or not. They

talk with the purpose of saying something. They write with the object of

expressing their ideas. They tell the truth and shame those who do not.

Hearts are warm because they own their souls. Those who really own their

souls will never lose them. As Joseph Bovshover, the fine poet of the

East Side has sung:

'_Beauty hideth,_

_Nature chideth,_

_When the heart is cold;_

_Fame is galling,_

_Gold's enthralling,_

_When the mind is sold._'

"They all assemble in the cafés, those universities of the East Side,

and in these places of judgment all things are determined. Is there a

great world problem that puzzles and vexes all mankind? The debaters at

one of these tea-houses take it up at their earliest discussion and soon

the problem is solved and the way of human progress is clear again. Is

there a question that has troubled the ages? Come and spend fifteen

minutes on the East Side, and the salvation of humanity will be assured

to you. There is so much squalor and suffering and sorrow here that

nothing can overcome the optimism of these chosen people. Their

incurable faith cannot be shaken even by their religious leaders, and

when they become atheists they are the most pious atheists in all the

world. But in the cafés the great issues given up in despair by famous

statesmen are met and decided upon. The trusts? Are they not paving the

way for the realization of Socialism? Not until all the industries have

been concentrated by the trusts will the people through the government

be able to take possession of them. Otherwise, how in the world will the

new régime, for instance, ever organize and take hold of all the peanut

stands of the land? You do not understand the question thoroughly if you

have not read the articles of I. A. Hurwitz in the 'Vorwarts.' The

future of war? There will be no war in the future. The workingmen of all

countries are uniting and so are the capitalists. The international

movement is not laboring in vain. Socialism is spreading in the European

armies. Every government will have enough trouble in its own land.

Others come here and say that every government will have to fight for

its own life and will not be able to do anything else. People will take

Tolstoy's advice and cease to pay taxes and withdraw their support from

the powers that rule. Tolstoy, say some, is a masterful artist, but

puerile as a philosopher, a curious mixture of genius and

narrow-mindedness, a man, who once having erred, now sins against

mankind by denying it the right of erring. The red-haired ragged orator

with blue eye-glasses and the face of a Hebrew Beethoven quotes

Ingersoll. 'Tolstoy,' said the agnostic, 'stands with his back to the

rising sun.' And did not Edward Carpenter say of Tolstoy's book, 'that

strange jumble of real acumen and bad logic, large-heartedness and

fanaticism--What is art?'

"Ibsen is somber because he is almost alone in seeing the most tragic

phases of life, because he feels compelled to treat what all other

artists have neglected. Many of his plays are too much like life to be

acted, and we go to the theatre only to see plays. One of the listeners

speaks of the appreciation of Ibsen in 'The New Spirit,' by Havellock

Ellis, and of the analogy that he finds between Ibsen and Whitman.

Zangwill places Ibsen above Shakespeare, and more recently he has

bestowed great praise upon Hauptmann. Rather strange of Zangwill, who is

himself not a realist and has gone in for Zionism, to like Ibsen so

much. And who is greater than Ibsen? some one asks. 'Perhaps it is I.

Zangwill,' says the cynical, frowzy and frowning little journalist. G.

Bernard Shaw is mentioned as a candidate, and his great little book on

Ibsenism comes in for a heated discussion. Brandes is quoted, and

several of his admirers present go into ecstasies over his works and

almost forget the writers whom he has treated. The pale-faced,

wistful-eyed poet with the Christlike face rises high on the wings of

his eloquence in praise of the Danish critic's appreciation of Heine,

and Brandes is declared to be one of the greatest Jews in the world.

What was it Brandes said about Zionism? Zionism, Socialism and Anarchism

come up in turn, and so many trenchant and vital things are said on

these subjects. Will the novel pass away? The dramatist--bulky and

bearded, impressive and strong-looking, with wonderful piercing

eyes--the dramatist is inclined to think that it will. The short story

is the story of the future. Long novels give one a glimpse of eternity.

By the time you come to the last chapter, conditions have so changed in

the world that you do not know whether the story is true to life or not.

It is the necessarily historical, the long novel is. Old Jules Verne has

won the East Side over with the fine words he has said on Guy De

Maupassant. Some admirers of Z. Libin say that the Frenchman is too

romantic, but on the whole he is the favorite story-writer. 'Yes,' says

the Jewish actor, 'De Maupassant writes for all the Yiddish papers'; and

in fact all the East Side dailies have for years been treating their

readers to his charming tales. He may be imagined to be a constant

contributor. Did not an old Israelite walk into the office of the

'Jewish Cry' and ask to see Friedrich Nietzsche? And then the problem of

Nietzsche comes up; whether he was, or was not a reaction against, or

the opposite extreme from, the meekness of Christianity, the weakness of

his time. Wagner's music, Stephen Phillips's poetry, Zola's essay on

realism, Maeterlinck's transcendentalism, Gorky's rise in letters, the

Anglo-Saxon isolation in literature, Ludwig Fuldas's latest play, all

these things are decided upon by people who understand them, more or

less.

"I cannot tell you more, but these meetings and these talks at various

times and in various places made my vacation on the East Side

delightful. Then there were lectures and meetings and social gatherings

of the comrades. The sun of new ideas rises on the East Side. Everywhere

you meet people who are ready to fight for what they believe in and who

do not believe in fighting. For a complete change and for pure air you

must go among the people who think about something, have faith in

something. Katz, Cahan, Gordin, Yanofsky, Zolotaroff, Harkavy, Frumkin,

Krantz, Zametkin, Zeifert, Lessin, Elisovitz, Winchevsky, Jeff,

Leontief, Lipsky, Freidus, Frominson, Selikowitch, Palay, Barondess, and

many other intellectual leaders, come into the cafés to pour out wisdom

and drink tea, and here comes also Hutchins Hapgood to get his

education. Each man bears his own particular lantern, it is true, but

each one carries a light and every one brings a man with him.

"There was that memorial mass-meeting in honor of Hirsh Leckert, the

Jewish shoemaker, who shot at the governor of Wilna, who took his life

in hand to avenge a hideous outrage perpetrated upon his fellow-workers

by a despicable despot. The Jewish working-people of Wilna organized a

peaceful procession, and at the behest of the governor hundreds of them

were mercilessly flogged--flogged until they fainted, and when revived,

flogged again. Then came this lowly hero, Leckert, and made a glorious

ascent on the scaffold. In the afternoon news reached the East Side

that Leckert was hanged. The same evening the working-people, just out

of their factories and sweat-shops, in overwhelming numbers assembled in

New Irving Hall, and the fervor and enthusiasm, the sobbing and the

sighing, the tear-stained faces and love-lit eyes--the soul-stirring

eulogies delivered--I shall never forget it. I tell you no man ever saw

anything greater or more inspiring on his vacation.

"Mr. Jacob Gordin gave me a memorable treat, took me to see his latest

and one of his best plays, 'Gott, Mensch, und der Teufel.' I have seen

many of his works and it is hard to decide which is the best because

they are nearly all so good. But this strange story of a Jewish Faust,

the pious, saintly Jew who, tempted by Satan's gold, step by step loses

his soul and cannot live without it; this wonderful blending of modern

realism and supernatural symbolism, this superb summary of man and the

new problem of life, the beauty and the strength of the work, is

remarkable, to say the least. 'As in times of yore,' says Satan, 'the

sons of Adam are divided into Abels and Cains. The former are constantly

murdered and the latter are the constant murderers. Gracious Lord, in

the new man there dwells the old savage Adam.' Sorry I cannot tell you

more about it now, but the last words of the play have been ringing

through my mind ever since I saw it.

'_All must die, all that is and lives;_

_Life alone is immortal._

_That only is mortal that desires and strives,_

_The striving and the desire immortal._'

"Why," added Keidansky, as a final thunderbolt, "I have gained enough

ideas on the East Side to last me here in Boston for ten years."

XXIII

Our Rivals in Fiction

"After all, what is man when compared to the hero of romance?" asked

Keidansky. "Beside the dashing, dauntless, duelling cavalier that now

moves through the popular novel and struts our stage," he said, "the

ordinary, mortal man of mere flesh and blood pales into insignificance.

Beside the extraordinary exploits of the storied hero, the doings of the

every-day man are like the foolish games of little children, only not

half so graceful. Beside the strange adventures of the leading

character, the simple efforts of earthly man are accounted as naught. It

would not be so bad if no one ever made comparisons, but women do, and

so men are always found wanting, and have a harrowing time of it.

"In the epic, the drama, the novel, the hero has nothing else to do but

to make love, to deliver pretty speeches, perform remarkable feats and

look graceful, and so he is ever so attractive. He plays upon the

hearts, takes hold of the minds, fastens himself upon the imaginations

of the gentle fair and fanciful. He knows just what to say, just what to

do, and just where to go, just when to return, and is always so

punctual--appears just in the nick of time to save as many lives as are

in danger. He becomes a model, a type, that the lady fair goes in quest

of, when the play is over, or the novel is ended. She turns to life for

the realization.

"In real life the young man has other things to do than making love,

posing prettily, whispering sweet somethings, framing compliments and

acting the gallant and defender of the fair and perfectly safe. He has

other things to do than wearing fine clothes and winning smiles. In real

life he has a real battle to fight. In real life he cannot always look

neat, act aptly, prate loudly, and say the improper thing at the proper

time. The improper thing at the proper time--that is the secret of

genius. Things are not so smooth in life. The guidance of Providence is

not so clear as are the directions of the playwright and novelist. Hard

to tell just what to do, just what to say, just where to go, and just

when to swear with impunity. Human beings are clumsy, awkward, uncouth.

Life is an embarrassing affair. To observe all the niceties is madness,

not to observe them is to be sent to a madhouse. What can a man do

against his all-powerful rival in fiction and the drama. His course is

clear, but we walk in darkness. The ways of God are mysterious, the ways

of men are crooked, and then--we are told to find the way. No matter how

much you stand on ceremony you are likely to slip and fall anyway. Life

is a labyrinth for which there is no specific geography.

"To state the matter more definitely, the problem is this: A young man

spends a half of his week's wages, takes the lady of his heart's desire

to the theatre--and she falls in love with the hero of the play--the

omnipresent, omnipotent hero. His every look, every word, every gesture,

every step, every venture--it is just too lovely for anything. Oh, it is

adorable, entrancing! And the young man who took her to the theatre, the

young man who really exists, what does he amount to? What a puny dwarf

he becomes beside the great giant of the drama. Who can say things so

sweetly, so smoothly, so sonorously, as the leading character or

characters in a play? Who can do things so neatly, so masterfully, and

surmount such overwhelming difficulties in the twinkling of an eye? Such

magnetic, magnanimous, majestic figures! It was after a pretty love

scene on the stage that I once heard a lady sitting near me say to her

companion, 'Oh, if some one would say "my dear" to me in that manner!'

And perhaps the young lady will go all through life without finding the

man, who will know enough to imitate that actor.

"A young man buys the latest and most loudly advertised historical novel

and sends it to the lady of his dreams. On the next evening when he

calls she is so absorbed, so immersed in the book that she hardly has

anytime to speak to him. When she does look up from the tome she tells

him all about the hair-raising hero, Count de Mar. 'He is a man,' she

says, and so goes on to relate about his mighty exploits. There is

nothing worth while in all the world except a man like Count de Mar.

Imagine, if you can, how the young man feels. And the lady chases the

phantom of Count de Mar in real life until she becomes a shadow of her

former self, and the young man goes through existence cursing the

historical novel in general and Count de Mar in particular. What else

but misery should there be for mere man of mere reality? What is he

beside such lords of creation as Count de Mar, Richard Carvel, Ralph

Percy, Ralph Marlow, Stephen Brice, Clayton Halowell, Charley Steele,

Jean Hugon, Marmaduke Howard, Count Karobke, Boris Godofsky, Louis De

Lamoy, General Kapzen, Prince Meturof--what is he beside these?

Everything is so small in life, in books things are so big. The world is

already created, but fiction is still being written. If Adam were

created by a novelist he would have fared much better. The story would

never have ended happily. These wonderful heroes, what fine means they

have, what splendid opportunities, what glorious achievements, what

great accomplishments are theirs. They can do just as they please, have

fortunes to squander, and riot in luxuries. They are all born rich, or

their rich relatives die early, and in good will.

"In reality it is so different. We have to work for a living and poverty

is our reward. In real life we have to write historical novels for a

living. We have to write popular plays and pretty poems and sugarcoated

stories. Yes, such is life, and there is poverty and the misery of the

masses, and there are social problems and political evils--things

unknown in the average novel, and in popular art generally. We must do

so much that is irksome in order to have a pleasurable moment.

"When Richard Mansfield was delivering those sumptuous stump speeches in

Shakespeare's spectacular melodrama of 'Henry V.' and the soldiers were

stirred up to the highest pitch of enthusiasm, the fair fraulein in

front of me constantly kept saying, 'Who wouldn't fight for Harry?' Who

wouldn't fight for Harry? A tremendous artist with superb words put into

his mouth by Shakespeare, with a beautiful scenic background behind him,

with gorgeous costumes and gleaming armor, with glowing electric lights,

with an army of well-drilled, well-paid supers, with all the pomp and

power of a king on the stage--who wouldn't fight for Harry? But the

poor, obscure, unknown Harry of real life, who faithfully fights against

poverty, disease, despair, who battles for the right, for his honor and

salvation, without scenic effects, without any art, or author's

directions, without any light or armor, without any aid or guides,

without any one to show the way--this Harry, who will fight for him? Who

does not fight against him? What fair damosel will deign to smile on him

and shed some sunshine into his life?

"This was on a street car, and I overheard a young woman say to her

escort, 'Ah, if you would only put your gloves on as Mansfield does in

"Beaucaire"!' So this was the great thing in the play--the manner in

which 'Beaucaire' donned his gloves. And yet--fool that I was--I had

wondered why an actor of Mansfield's surpassing talent should put on

the stage such a trivial, trashy affair. And I had gone without gloves

all winter in order that I might be able to see Mansfield. Heavens! But

see, how the little niceties, the small delicacies and the petty graces

on the stage and in books eclipse all our drudging and trudging, moiling

and toiling in real life. We are expected to observe them whatever else

we do. Failing in these we fail to win affections and are voted dead

failures. Beside these we are expected to do things that can only be

done in books and on the stage, under the auspices of Alexandre Dumas

the elder and Victor Sardou, for instance. We are expected to equal

those magic creatures of the imagination, the heroes with their opulent

supplies of good looks, words and wealth, and their strange power to do

aught on earth.

"James--we will call him that--is red-headed, freckled, plain, and

generally not at all dudish. He is, however, true, loyal, devoted and

determined to do some good in the world. He tries to meet her every day

after work. He often brings a flower with him, tucked up in his sleeve.

Once we saw him press it to his lips, for soon the bloom will be hers.

But she is reading an historical novel, and even the flower fails to

deliver his message and fades without fulfilling its mission. Of course,

James has this advantage over the ideal hero in the novel: that he

really exists; but what is reality to the glowing fancy of a youthful

maiden? And in spite of his existence, where does James come in?

"These are local and popular incidents I have mentioned, but in a

measure all literature, all art has created impossible dreams,

unattainable ideals. This is probably the reason why so many aspirations

have failed. They were not founded on reality. There are in life

considerations 'without which the noblest dreams are a form of opium

eating.' Who knows how many have gone grieving through life because they

have followed the phantoms conjured up by the false standards of art?

With all that is great and grand, heroic and epic in real life there is

still such a thing as

'_The high that proved too high, the heroic for earth too hard,_

_The passion that left the ground to lose itself in the sky._'

"Anyway, it is about time to protest against the false heroes of paper

and ink, who cut us out of our earthly paradise, to give our rivals in

fiction the death stab; about time to remember that that which is not

cannot be great, and that all the beauty of this universe is in real

life. It is about time to deny the existence of that which does not

exist.

"This demand for the superhuman is inhuman. We are not what we are not.

We cannot do what we cannot do, and these platitudes are as profound as

they are obvious. The weakness of the world is pointed out by its

heromania. That we look for our heroes not in life but in artificial

creations shows how blind we are. The most striking sign of our

imperfection is our longing for impossible perfection. Life has a great

grudge against art. It has been slighted, disregarded, abused. With its

misleading models it has set up an unjust competition against life. The

hope is that the artists to come will give life a hearing and adjust

matters. As for the novelists, every time the good Mr. Howells

horsewhips the swashbucklers I heartily applaud him. But I am not going

to lay down any principles. I don't feel like it to-day. Perhaps things

as they were were for the best. Perhaps it is for the dreams of women

that there are real men in the world to-day. Perhaps it is their longing

for the impossible that made the best that is possible to-day. I

sometimes think that a woman's reason is the very acme of all wisdom.

But I am going to treat this thing more fully in my volume of essays--if

I ever get around to writing them."

XXIV

On Enjoying One's Own Writings

I was alone, ensconced in a corner of the noisy, smoky café, perusing

the pages of a valued volume. Keidansky walked in hastily, took up my

book and looked at it.

"How can you read anything that you have not written yourself?" he

asked, with surprising solemnity. "Why, I don't mind it any longer; I am

used to it now," I mumbled in astonishment. But conversations with

Keidansky are one-sided. Before I had formed half a thought he was all

ready with speech.

"You are coming down, dear fellow," he said; "you are compromising and

becoming reconciled to everything. You cannot supply your own demand, so

you are going elsewhere for your literature--spending on others your

days and your nights that you may devote to the excavations of the

things that lie deep and dormant within thyself. I wager that before

long you will even be reading the classics. You will abdicate from the

sovereignty of your own genius, and measure life by the enjoyment that

you derive from the things that other people do.

"Aliens, foreigners, strangers as far away from you as different

individuals are, millions of miles of impassable icebergs impeding any

possible approach. They were not born as you were born, they have not

lived as you have lived, they have not loved as you have loved, they

have not hated as you have hated, they have not grappled with the

agonies as you have, they have not died as you have over and over again,

and yet--you read their books and pretend to enjoy them."

I asked my friend to be seated, but he preferred to stand up, and with a

characteristic wave of the hand, showed his annoyance at being

interrupted. "If you have not felt what I have felt," he said, "it is

useless for me to speak to you, and for you to enjoy what I write is

hard and tedious labor. You cannot get behind the things others say, and

all that remains for you to do is to read the meaning in so many words;

and no meaning is ever absolutely uttered in so many words. There is

almost always something unsaid behind the thing that is said. There is

as much in as there is out. Thought is an endless chain of which we only

see separate rings. We are fortunate to see that in the case of other

persons. Most often you only hear and read their talk. But when you read

your own thought, you read so vastly more than you have written, and you

read the history of your thoughts, their far-away causes, their

prehistoric origins, and their subterranean sources--and you enjoy it.

You enjoy it, if you are intimately concerned in one near and dear

personality, in the greatest study in all mankind--yourself. Also, if

you are interested in the evolution of human thought, and can see it

through the operations of your own mind.

Discourses of Keidansky · 第 11 / 12 段