ON HABITS

|I sat down to write an article this morning, but found I could make

no progress. There was grit in the machine somewhere, and the wheels

refused to revolve. I was writing with a pen--a new fountain pen

that someone had been good enough to send me, in commemoration of an

anniversary, my interest in which is now very slight, but of which one

or two well-meaning friends are still in the habit of reminding me. It

was an excellent pen, broad and free in its paces, and capable of a most

satisfying flourish. It was a pen, you would have said, that could have

written an article about anything. You had only to fill it with ink and

give it its head, and it would gallop away to its journey's end without

a pause. That is how I felt about it when I sat down. But instead of

galloping, the thing was as obstinate as a mule. I could get no more

speed out of it than Stevenson could get out of his donkey in the

Cevennes. I tried coaxing and I tried the bastinado, equally without

effect on my Modestine.

Then it occurred to me that I was in conflict with a habit. It is my

practice to do my writing with a pencil. Days, even weeks, pass without

my using a pen for anything more than signing my name. On the other hand

there are not many hours of the day when I am without a pencil between

thumb and finger. It has become a part of my organism as it were, a mere

extension of my hand. There, at the top of my second finger, is a little

bump, raised in its service, a monument erected by the friction of a

whole forest of pencils that I have worn to the stump. A pencil is to

me what his sword was to D'Artagnan, or his umbrella was to the Duke

of Cambridge, or his cheroot was to Grant, or whittling a stick was to

Jackson or--in short, what any habit is to anybody. Put a pencil in my

hand, seat me before a blank writing pad in an empty room, and I am, as

they say of the children, as good as gold. I tick on as tranquilly as an

eight-day clock. I may be dismissed from the mind, ignored, forgotten.

But the magic wand must be a pencil. Here was I sitting with a pen

in my hand, and the whole complex of habit was disturbed. I was in an

atmosphere of strangeness. The pen kept intruding between me and my

thoughts. It was unfamiliar to the touch. It seemed to write a foreign

language in which nothing pleased me.

This tyranny of little habits which is familiar to all of us is nowhere

better described than in the story which Sir Walter Scott told to Rogers

of his school days. “There was,” he said, “a boy in my class at school

who stood always at the top, nor could I with all my effort, supplant

him. Day came after day and still he kept his place, do what I would;

till at length I observed that, when a question was asked him, he always

fumbled with his fingers at a particular button in the lower part of his

waistcoat. To remove it, therefore, became expedient in my eye, and in

an evil moment it was removed with a knife. Great was my anxiety to know

the success of my measure, and it succeeded too well. When the boy was

again questioned his fingers sought again for the button, but it was not

to be found. In his distress he looked down for it--it was to be seen no

more than to be felt. He stood confounded, and I took possession of his

place; nor did he ever recover it, or ever, I believe, suspect who was

the author of his wrong. Often in after-life has the sight of him

smote me as I passed by him, and often have I resolved to make him some

reparation; but it ended in good resolutions. Though I never renewed

my acquaintance with him, I often saw him, for he filled some inferior

office in one of the courts of law at Edinburgh. Poor fellow! I believe

he is dead, he took early to drinking.”

It was rather a shabby trick of young Scott's, and all one can say in

regard to its unhappy consequences is that a boy so delicately balanced

and so permanently undermined by a trifle would in any case have come.

to grief in this rough world. There is no harm in cultivating habits,

so long as they are not injurious habits. Indeed, most of us are little

more than bundles of habits neatly done up in coat and trousers. Take

away our habits and the residuum would hardly be worth bothering about.

We could not get on without them. They simplify the mechanism of life.

They enable us to do a multitude of things automatically which, if we

had to give fresh and original thought to them each time, would make

existence an impossible confusion. The more we can regularise our

commonplace activities by habit, the smoother our path and the more

leisure we command. To take a simple case. I belong to a club, large but

not so large as to necessitate attendants in the cloakroom. You hang up

your own hat and coat and take them down when you want them. For a long

time it was my practice to hang them anywhere where there was a vacant

hook and to take no note of the place. When I sought them I found it

absurdly difficult to find them in the midst of so many similar hats and

coats. Memory did not help me, for memory refused to burden itself with

such trumpery things, and so daily after lunch I might be seen wandering

forlornly and vacuously between the rows and rows of clothes in search

of my own garments murmuring, “Where _did_ I put my hat?” Then one day a

brilliant inspiration seized me. I would always hang my coat and hat on

a certain peg, or if that were occupied, on the vacant peg nearest to

it. It needed a few days to form the habit, but once formed it worked

like a charm. I can find my hat and coat without thinking about finding

them. I go to them as unerringly as a bird to its nest, or an arrow to

its mark. It is one of the unequivocal triumphs of my life.

But habits should be a stick that we use, not a crutch to lean on. We

ought to make them for our convenience or enjoyment and occasionally

break them to assert our independence. We ought to be able to employ

them, without being discomposed when we cannot employ them. I once

saw Mr Balfour so discomposed, like Scott's school rival, by a trivial

breach of habit. Dressed, I think, in the uniform of an Elder Brother of

Trinity House he was proposing a toast at a dinner at the Mansion House.

It is his custom in speaking to hold the lapels of his coat. It is the

most comfortable habit in speaking, unless you want to fling your arms

about in a rhetorical fashion. It keeps your hands out of mischief

and the body in repose. But the uniform Mr Balfour was wearing had no

lapels, and when the hands went up in search of them they wandered about

pathetically like a couple of children who had lost their parents on

Blackpool sands. They fingered the buttons in nervous distraction, clung

to each other in a visible access of grief, broke asunder and resumed

the search for the lost lapels, travelled behind his back, fumbled with

the glasses on the table, sought again for the lapels, did everything

but take refuge in the pockets of the trousers. It was a characteristic

omission. Mr Balfour is too practised a speaker to come to disaster as

the boy in Scott's story did; but his discomfiture was apparent. He

struggled manfully through his speech, but all the time it was obvious

that he was at a loss what to do with his hands, having no lapels on

which to hang them.

I happily had a remedy for my disquietude. I put up my pen, took out

a pencil, and, launched once more into the comfortable rut of habit,

ticked away peacefully like the eight-day clock. And this is the (I

hope) pardonable result.

[Illustration: 0036]

Windfalls · 第 9 / 63 题