VI.

Of how many dwellings can it be said that no word of anger is ever heard

beneath its roof, and that no unkindly feeling ever exists between the

inmates? Most men's experience would seem to justify them in declaring

that, throughout the inhabited world, no such house exists. I, knowing

at all events of one, admit the possibility that there may be more; yet I

feel that it is to hazard a conjecture; I cannot point with certainty to

any other instance, nor in all my secular life (I speak as one who has

quitted the world) could I have named a single example.

It is so difficult for human beings to live together; nay, it is so

difficult for them to associate, however transitorily, and even under the

most favourable conditions, without some shadow of mutual offence.

Consider the differences of task and of habit, the conflict of

prejudices, the divergence of opinions (though that is probably the same

thing), which quickly reveal themselves between any two persons brought

into more than casual contact, and think how much self-subdual is

implicit whenever, for more than an hour or two, they co-exist in seeming

harmony. Man is not made for peaceful intercourse with his fellows; he

is by nature self-assertive, commonly aggressive, always critical in a

more or less hostile spirit of any characteristic which seems strange to

him. That he is capable of profound affections merely modifies here and

there his natural contentiousness, and subdues its expression. Even

love, in the largest and purest sense of the word, is no safeguard

against perilous irritation and sensibilities inborn. And what were the

durability of love without the powerful alliance of habit?

Suppose yourself endowed with such power of hearing that all the talk

going on at any moment beneath the domestic roofs of any town became

clearly audible to you; the dominant note would be that of moods,

tempers, opinions at jar. Who but the most amiable dreamer can doubt it?

This, mind you, is not the same thing as saying that angry emotion is the

ruling force in human life; the facts of our civilization prove the

contrary. Just because, and only because, the natural spirit of conflict

finds such frequent scope, does human society hold together, and, on the

whole, present a pacific aspect. In the course of ages (one would like

to know how many) man has attained a remarkable degree of self-control;

dire experience has forced upon him the necessity of compromise, and

habit has inclined him (the individual) to prefer a quiet, orderly life.

But by instinct he is still a quarrelsome creature, and he gives vent to

the impulse as far as it is compatible with his reasoned interests--often,

to be sure, without regard for that limit. The average man or woman is

always at open discord with some one; the great majority could not live

without oft-recurrent squabble. Speak in confidence with any one you

like, and get him to tell you how many cases of coldness, alienation, or

downright enmity, between friends and kinsfolk, his memory registers; the

number will be considerable, and what a vastly greater number of everyday

"misunderstandings" may be thence inferred! Verbal contention is, of

course, commoner among the poor and the vulgar than in the class of well-

bred people living at their ease, but I doubt whether the lower ranks of

society find personal association much more difficult than the refined

minority above them. High cultivation may help to self-command, but it

multiplies the chances of irritative contact. In mansion, as in hovel,

the strain of life is perpetually felt--between the married, between

parents and children, between relatives of every degree, between

employers and employed. They debate, they dispute, they wrangle, they

explode--then nerves are relieved, and they are ready to begin over

again. Quit the home and quarrelling is less obvious, but it goes on all

about one. What proportion of the letters delivered any morning would be

found to be written in displeasure, in petulance, in wrath? The postbag

shrieks insults or bursts with suppressed malice. Is it not

wonderful--nay, is it not the marvel of marvels--that human life has

reached such a high point of public and private organization?

And gentle idealists utter their indignant wonder at the continuance of

war! Why, it passes the wit of man to explain how it is that nations are

ever at peace! For, if only by the rarest good fortune do individuals

associate harmoniously, there would seem to be much less likelihood of

mutual understanding and good-will between the peoples of alien lands. As

a matter of fact, no two nations are ever friendly, in the sense of truly

liking each other; with the reciprocal criticism of countries there

always mingles a sentiment of animosity. The original meaning of

_hostis_ is merely stranger, and a stranger who is likewise a foreigner

will only by curious exception fail to stir antipathy in the average

human being. Add to this that a great number of persons in every country

find their delight and their business in exasperating international

disrelish, and with what vestige of common sense can one feel surprise

that war is ceaselessly talked of, often enough declared. In days gone

by, distance and rarity of communication assured peace between many

realms. Now that every country is in proximity to every other, what need

is there to elaborate explanations of the distrust, the fear, the hatred,

which are a perpetual theme of journalists and statesmen? By

approximation, all countries have entered the sphere of natural quarrel.

That they find plenty of things to quarrel about is no cause for

astonishment. A hundred years hence there will be some possibility of

perceiving whether international relations are likely to obey the law

which has acted with such beneficence in the life of each civilized

people; whether this country and that will be content to ease their

tempers with bloodless squabbling, subduing the more violent promptings

for the common good. Yet I suspect that a century is a very short time

to allow for even justifiable surmise of such an outcome. If by any

chance newspapers ceased to exist . . .

Talk of war, and one gets involved in such utopian musings!

The Private Papers of Henry Ryecroft · 第 37 / 112 题