IV

Of all that Mr. Moore said on that extraordinary occasion, I remember

most his sudden outburst into what he called practical politics.

He demanded the impeachment of Mr. Asquith, the restoration of the

Coronation Oath and the abolition of all dogs! The comic incongruity of

those three items in a plan to win the war was apparent neither to him

nor his three elderly auditors, or so it seemed, and I deemed it wise

to control my laughter. Mr. Moore declared that Mr. Asquith's inertia,

of which we were hearing so much then, was certain to bring defeat to

the Allies. One of Mr. Asquith's daughters had sat beside Mr. Moore at

dinner one night in London and had informed her neighbour that "Father

is bored with the War!" whereupon Mr. Moore informed her (or so he

said) that her father's boredom might cause the Allies to lose the War.

Mr. Asquith was guilty of more serious crimes than that: he had ruined

the Irish gentleman and delivered the country over to hobbledehoys and

low minded peasants. Not content with ruining Ireland, no longer fit

to be inhabited by gentlemen, fit only to be the country of publicans,

pawnbrokers, priests and politicians, Mr. Asquith had tried to make

equal ruin in England. He has abolished the Coronation Oath which,

until his advent, had always been administered to the kings of England

at their crowning. In this Oath, they declare their belief that the

Mass is an idolatrous ceremony, not to be acknowledged by reasonable

persons and likely to be accepted only by vulgar Papists. Mr. Asquith,

mindful of the fact that many hundreds of thousands of Catholics are

members of the British Commonwealth of Nations, decided that the kings

of England should not be humiliated and embarrassed at their coronation

by the compulsion to insult the faith of many of their subjects; and so

he introduced a Bill into Parliament to abolish the Oath, which was,

in due time, abolished. Mr. Moore seemed to think that all the evils

from which mankind has suffered since 1914 directly sprang from that

political achievement.

As for dogs, these abominable animals, he said, are nuisances at any

time, but during a war and period of food shortage, they are a positive

menace to the country. He begged us to consider (a) the great quantity

of food consumed by dogs, (b) the amount of nervous irritability

brought about by their incessant yapping, and (c) the extent to which

they defile the streets. He threatened us with famine, insanity and,

finally, plague!... There is an English poet who is also a breeder

of bulldogs. Whenever he reads one of Mr. Moore's periodical canine

denunciations, he becomes so enraged that only the strongest efforts of

his friends prevent him from emptying the contents of his kennels on to

Mr. Moore's doorstep that they may there do their worst. The ambition

of his life is to see one of his bulldogs fasten its teeth firmly in

the calf of Mr. Moore's venerable leg....

V

All that has been written here so far will seem to support the

superstition that Mr. Moore is a trifler with life, that he is a man

destitute of serious purposes; but I am anxious to make plain to

my readers that this superstition is a superstition. His lack of

reticence about his own and other people's affairs and his perverse

incursions into what he imagines to be practical politics are obviously

responsible for the belief that he is what is called "a typical

Irishman," that is to say, a man without a sense of responsibility.

My experience is that "typical Irishmen" are generally discovered

to be Englishmen or Welshmen or New York East Side Jews--the late

Padraic Pearse, Mr. Arthur Griffith and Mr. de Valera correspond to

those descriptions--but it is undeniable that Mr. Moore, not without

deliberation, has helped to maintain the legend that Irishmen are

without a sense of responsibility. When, for example, during one of

the many Home Rule crises, he suggested that the trouble between the

two islands of Great Britain and Ireland might easily be settled by

intelligent engineers, many persons were of the opinion that a man

who could talk such twaddle, as they called it, in a time of much

difficulty ought to be imprisoned. The proposal, when the details were

disclosed, confirmed pessimists in their profound belief that the

unsurmountable obstacle to the solution of Irish affairs is the Irish

themselves! What Mr. Moore suggested was this: that a thick wall

should be built across the North Channel between the Giant's Causeway

and the Mull of Kintyre, and that another thick wall should be built

across St. George's Channel between Carnsore Point and St. David's

Head. These operations completed, the engineers should then pump out

all the water in the Irish Sea, fill in the resultant gap with earth,

and make one island out of two! He seemed not to have considered the

case of Liverpool. What, some one jestingly demanded, would become

of that great port when deprived of its "pool"? What also, he might

have added, would become of Belfast and Dublin, deprived, the one of

its Lough, and the other, of its Bay? Mr. Moore might have retorted

that what Ireland lost on Belfast Lough it would more than gain on

Galway Bay, but he preferred to remain silent. One could, of course,

draw a conclusion, packed with thought and judgment, from Mr. Moore's

playful proposal, and I do not doubt that such was his intention; but

the average person is either too busy or disinclined to draw such

conclusions from anything; and so, having glanced casually at the

details of Mr. Moore's plan to settle the Irish Question, he turned

impatiently away, convinced (a) that Mr. Moore was an incorrigible

buffoon, and (b) that the government of Ireland must ever remain an

unsolved problem because of the Irish people's amazing inability to

conduct themselves reasonably!

But Mr. Moore has a serious purpose in life, and he pursues that

serious purpose with indefatigable industry. The immediate and

unmistakable fact about him is that he is an artist. There are few

writers in English, not even excepting Mr. Conrad, who have so much

power over words as is possessed by George Moore, and this power has

been achieved, as all power is achieved, by incessant labour and the

most pure devotion. He is, in the real sense, a self-made man. The

artistry that is undeniably his has been wrought not only in the sweat

of his brain, but in face of powerful obstacles. His position as the

heir of a fairly well-to-do landowner in Ireland might have resulted

in him becoming a minor poet, publishing tiny verses in tiny volumes,

or a small author of fragile essays about butterflies and pierrots.

He did, in fact, begin his writing career, as most reputable writers

do, by composing poems, but he speedily turned to prose. He actually

published verses in books entitled "Flowers of Passion"--a name which

incongruously suggests Baudelaire and Ella Wheeler Wilcox--and "Pagan

Poems," but, so far as I have been able to discover, no one has ever

seen these books or read the poems contained in them. The first was

published in 1877 and the second in 1881 and we may conclude that they

have been dissolved by the chemicals of time. Miss Mitchell, in the

book to which reference has already been made, states that "nobody in

Ireland has ever seen any of Mr. Moore's paintings except 'A. E.' to

whom he once shyly showed a head, remarking that it had some 'quality.'

'A. E.' remained silent." The poems remain under the same kindly

condemnation. The favourable fortune which might have made a minor

poet, and nothing but a minor poet, out of Mr. Moore was one of the

powerful obstacles to his becoming a master of prose.

The other was the attempt made by his father to influence his mind.

In the preface from which I have already made a brief quotation, he

gives an account of his education at the Roman Catholic school of

Oscott. George, it seemed, had a reticence in his childhood which he

remarkably lost in maturity: he refused to confess his sins on the

singular ground that he had not got any sins to confess. He had not

then learned, seemingly, that he who has not got any sins to confess,

can easily invent a few. The story of this episode is fully narrated

in "Hail and Farewell," but in the new preface Mr. Moore summarizes it

and tells how his father was summoned to Oscott by the president of

the school "to inquire into his son's lack of belief in priests and

their sacraments." The upshot of the business was that the boy, "not

only the last boy in the class, but in the last class in the school--in

a word, the dunce of the school" was removed from Oscott for private

instruction at home in Mayo. "George's case is really very alarming,"

the president wrote to his father, and the letter contained the

admission that he did not know whether George would not or could not

learn.

It is exceedingly illuminating to observe how his prose style has grown

through a series of very diverse books into its present condition. One

of his most remarkable novels, as it is also one of his earliest, "A

Mummers Wife," was clearly written under the influence of Zola, but

with such individual quality that Zola might profitably have taken

lessons from his pupil. The difference between Emile Zola and George

Moore is that while Zola never forgot to be a doctrinaire, Moore never

forgot to be an artist. "A Mummer's Wife" was unaccountably banned by

the circulating libraries in England, and, such is the conservatism

of these remarkable institutions, that I believe the ban is still

maintained, although a generation has arisen which regards it as very

restrained indeed. The style in which it is written is somewhat arid,

and the reader is not carried forward by the flow of the story itself,

but is forced along by its weight. A comparison between "A Mummer's

Wife," or "Esther Waters," and such later books as "The Lake" or "The

Brook Kerith" reveals such a difference in manner that the critic has

some difficulty in believing that all four novels came from the mind

of the same author. Mr. Wells is a writer with many manners, but the

reader can discover a unifying characteristic, unmistakably Wellsian,

in all of them. Mr. Shaw, a more consistent author than most men of his

quality, has kept so closely to one level that the difference between

his earliest, his best and his latest work is merely the difference

of degree between growing powers, highest powers and declining powers.

The style in the novels, "Love Among the Artists," "The Unsocial

Socialist," "The Irrational Knot" and "Cashel Byron's Profession"

is the same style, under less control, as the style of "Man and

Superman," "John Bull's Other Island," "Heartbreak House" and "Back To

Methuselah." But in Mr. Moore's case the style of "A Mummer's Wife" has

no obvious relationship to that of "The Lake" or "The Brook Kerith."

The difference between the earlier books and the later ones is the

difference between the flow of a river through a canal and the flow of

a river through its natural bed.

Some Impressions of My Elders · 第 52 / 75 题