CHAPTER III

THE FRIENDLY BOWL

Hard things are said of the London public-house. It is dirty; it

is dingy; there is nothing to sit on; there is nothing to read; it

possesses neither intellect nor domino set; it is not a place where a

man can take his wife and family; it should be improved, it should be

suppressed (subtle distinction), and so on. The curious side of these

assaults is that the people who rave at the public-house are not the

people one sees in it, and one wonders whether they passionately desire

public-houses after their own heart, and, presumably, for their own

use. I have visions of the public-house of their dreams, æsthetic and

antiseptic, furnished, according to persuasion, with Fabian tracts, or

tracts of greater orthodoxy. I imagine a staid crowd in that reformed

public-house, let us say, the Reverend Dr Horton and party, quaffing

the foaming cider-cup and discussing the principles of reconstruction;

Mr Sidney Webb and Mr Bernard Shaw passionately engaged at spillikins

... and the working man in the modest background.

The idea has little attraction, because, frankly, I like the London

public-house, just as I like the Paris café and the German beer-hall.

I do not see why we should make our public-houses into Parisian cafés,

for our needs differ from those of Parisians, and we do not, among

other things, visit public-houses to play dominoes or to read _The

Spectator_. Men go to public-houses to drink, either because they are

thirsty, or because they like drink. Notably, the working man goes

there to be rid of that wife and family of which he sees quite enough.

I know it is difficult for the well-to-do man, whose house contains ten

rooms, who has a private room at his office, and a sulking chair at

his club, to understand that the working man, who generally lives in

two rooms with several children and the scented memory of many meals,

should want to escape this felicitous atmosphere. It may also strike

him as strange that the working man should not, after a ten-hour day,

relish ‘a good, brisk walk.’ Also, he does not realise that ours is not

yet a kid-glove civilisation, and that most of our working people like

the sensual life. Being Anglo-Saxons, they are largely impervious to

art, and rather crude in love; so their sensuality finds an outlet in

drink. You may deplore this sensuality, but it is no use trying to stem

it by making distasteful the conditions under which it is indulged; the

way to stem it is to make a change in the creature, by treating it as a

man, by paying it as a citizen, and by granting it justice instead of

favour, education instead of teaching.

A new English people will make a new public-house; to-day, they have

the public-house they deserve, and it is not such an evil place as

some like to make out. Pellucid reader, have you ever visited The

Green Man? The Red Lion? or The Bedford Head? Do you know the brew of

The Warrington and The Horseshoe’s chop? I like their busy bars, so

cunningly stratified into public bar, private bar, and saloon. They

are a microcosm of English society, where everybody keeps himself to

himself, where every class is defiled by every other class because

the one beneath is ‘low,’ and the one above ‘stuck up.’ In England,

classes barely establish internal toleration. There are few equals

inside classes. One either looks up or looks down, and one never looks

at. But in public-houses a rude toleration does exist. They are not

unattractive, for rough friendship is included by every barmaid in the

‘gin and peach.’ One talks to people one does not know. If one stays,

one may hear the history of their life. Nor are all public-houses ugly;

there is a Dickensian, a Jacobean charm in the dazzle of their many

glasses, in their piling bottles, their ash-trays presented by the

brewer, their match-stands, a gift from the distiller, in the portraits

of horses and dogs that proclaim the virtues of Johnny Walker, and

Black and White. Æsthetically speaking, these articles are ugly, but

they have a certain joviality which is not disagreeable.

[Illustration:

THE PUB]

It is a mistake to think that public-houses are all alike. No two

places are alike; not even Lyons’s depots are all alike, for

the personality of the manageress reveals itself, say in strange

arrangements of salt-cellars. The casual visitor may not find much

difference between The Red Lion in the Harrow Road, The Hero of Maida,

Bricklayers’ Arms, or The Archway, and I will not stress it. But

it would need a more than casual observer to overlook the spacious

cleanliness of The Warrington, and its rather Victorian air of solid

comfort; should he go to Rule’s, or The Cheshire Cheese, he will

be obsessed by the domestic fustiness of places that have escaped

renovation for a century. Those old taverns reveal a London little

older than fifty years, when no Ritz-Carltons were open, when the young

man could join no club until he was a middle-aged one, and when he ate

his meals in his rooms in Bury Street off soiled mahogany. These old

places are traditional, and their ale is traditional. I suspect that it

is a secret blend of old ale and new ale, the new being poured into the

old casks, thus ever inheriting and ever bequeathing the virtues of the

family.

And other inns have their temperament, which is that of their

customers. Thus, at the public-houses of London Wall, as also at

Coates’s Wine Bar, you never get away from the sense of business. These

places are friendly, but wary. Likewise, at The Cock, in Fleet Street,

there is more noise and less wariness, because here is an exchange

for news, and occasionally for facts; farther on, at Shirreff’s, the

attraction is sound wine under sound arches. Shirreff’s clientèle

numbers rather obese people who know how to treat a glass of port. Thus

should you treat a glass of port: let the glass be not quite full,

so that the holy wine may have space in which to unwind its lovely

surface; raise the glass, holding its stem so that the fingers may not

break the amber oval of its form; then raise it to the level of the

eyes, so that the pale light of the city may stream through that rich

amber, and emerge transfigured; draw closer; respectfully breathe in

the soft, insidious scent that rises to your nostrils like a prayer.

Then only, when the golden ghost has spoken to all senses save that of

taste, drink, and drink slowly, without haste, with respect, not as a

vulgar man, thirsty, but as a man without thirst, and risen over such

necessity. Thus only shall you be companions of Amarante, Miranda, and

Sabor.

If all drank with such elegance we might hear less of public-house

reform. Of late years, attempts have been made to humanise the

public-house; the first result has been to make it inhuman. I lead

no attack upon the Public-House Trust and the People’s Refreshment

House Association. They are excellent bodies, and once upon a time I

supported them, but as I grow older, I think I grow more depraved. I

know it is not pleasant to see people drunk, though some are still more

unpleasant when they are sober; I do not support the public-house in

selling last week’s sandwiches and last year’s cheddar, but still ...

ale that hath no sting ... and leadless glaze! Instinct wars with my

reason; I see the public-houses grow more civilised, and a faint regret

creeps over me that good intentions should get into beer.

It is true that at the other end of the scale luxury fights with good

intentions and produces, well, not the abomination of desolation, but

the greater abomination of delectation in the shape of the American

bar. Already a young civilisation has produced its first-fruits, such

as broncho busting, college yells, and cinema rides; already poets

quaff from the foaming soda-fountain in Hippocrene City, Pa. (or

possibly Minn.), and in the friendly bowl mix the cocktail. Magic

word, eloquent in form! I cannot express what I owe to the cocktail:

it provides half of what a dinner party needs, for it stimulates

conversation. The other half is provided by bridge, for it stops this

conversation. The power of the cocktail is not that of the pure in

heart; it is a complex, a modern; it is a congress of alcohols; nothing

is alien to it; nothing can hallow it; nothing can resist its repeated

assaults. With all drinks it has affinity. It carries the bar sinister

of all liqueurs. Bitters and curaçao, whisky and maraschino, brandy,

vermouth and cassis, Fernet Branca, gentle raspberry, all of these; and

crème de menthe, and gin, and absinthe, and apple-jack, these, too,

are of its fiery soul, and apricot brandy that is like a blush, sherry

like a burnt topaz, paprika to make you leap, and sly benedictine,

dancing anisette, and port like a minor canon, gins from Plymouth,

and Schiedam, virginal grenadine, all can join with all the fruits

the world has ever known, cherry, lemon, tangerine, olive, spray of

tarragon too. And thus one begins a cocktail. Let your basis be gin;

enlist vermouth; let bitter and maraschino creep in: behold Martini!

But expel the vermouth to substitute apricot brandy: then you have

Hungarian. But if for you gin has no fire, then let your mainstay be

rye whisky: its allies, bitter and vermouth, and Manhattan for you

appears. And others for you shall rise, soda cocktail and love tree,

or silver fizz, or blagden punch ... or hot apple toddy. Treat not the

cocktail rudely. Let all coalitions be gradual, and temper their fire

with ground ice; then cast the whole in the silver mixer and shake,

shake, shake. While you shake, meditate.

In English bars they neither shake nor meditate; they drink too

uncritically the expression of the brewer’s artistic temperament, and

give forth too little of their own. But, still, they are pleasant

enough, these bars, whether British, as the gloomily popular Leicester

Lounge, or foreign as the Monico. They have all the well-bred

indifference of the Englishman who asks you no questions because he

seeks no answers, who makes no comments because he has nothing to say.

You need, you pay, you are satisfied, you go. There is no revelry. For

true revelry, the glass that sparkles and the jug that foams, you must

go to some club at least a hundred years old, and in St James’s Street

or Pall Mall, where ‘old man’ and ‘old thing’ know each other’s record

and capacity, where, under an ancient roof, the prairie oyster revives

the spirits that flagged in the Row. Watch the bow windows of some

ancient club, and, while still holding that good wine needs no bush,

confess that good wine gets it.

IV

WANDERERS

A London Mosaic · 第 3 / 9 章