When the epic of walking comes to be written, there are at least two

moments in which equipment will be charged with the full force of the

poetic current. One is at the very beginning of a walk, when everything

is fresh and clean, when shirts are cool and unrumpled, and boots are

new-greased, and the walking-stick lies cold and hard in the hand, and

the knapsack sits on the shoulders like a bird new-poised and still

unfamiliar with its perch. At such a moment who can think of practical

and material purposes? Reason may whisper that the grease will make our

boots pliable, that the stick will prove useful, that the knapsack

contains many indispensable things for the ending of the day. But at the

moment we have no such thoughts of the practical value of equipment: we

feel only that we are equipped, that we are armed for the combat with

time and space and wind and weather and mental depression and abstract

thinking; and so we fling out our chests and stamp our feet on Mother

Earth, and away to the rhythm of the dotted tribrach. ‘And Telemachus

girt on his sharp sword and grasped his spear and stood by his seat at

his father’s side armed with gleaming bronze.’

The other moment comes later, when we are some days upon our way. Boots

have grown limp: clothes have settled into natural skin-like rumples:

the stick is warm and smooth to our touch: the map slips easily in and

out of the pocket, lucubrated by dog’s-ears: every article in the

knapsack has found its natural place, and the whole has settled on to

our shoulders as its home. The equipment is no longer an external armour

of which we are conscious: it is part of ourselves that has come through

the combat with us, and is indissolubly linked with its memories. At the

start this coat was a glorious thing to face the world in: now it is

merely an outer skin. At the start this stick was mine: now it is

myself.

When it is all over the coat will go back to the cupboard and the curved

suspensor, and the shirts and stockings will go to the wash, to resume

conventional form and texture, and take their place in the humdrum

world. But the stick will stand in the corner unchanged, with mellowed

memories of the miles we went together, with every dent upon it

recalling the austerities of the high hills, and every tear in its bark

reminding me of the rocks of the Gable and Bowfell. And in the darkest

hours of urban depression I will sometimes take out that dog’s-eared

map and dream awhile of more spacious days; and perhaps a dried blade of

grass will fall out of it to remind me that once I was a free man on the

hills, and sang the Seventh Symphony to the sheep on Wetherlam.

VIII

WALKING ALONE

WITH A DIGRESSION ON LONDON WALKING

‘Lass, O Welt, O lass mich sein.’

VIII

WALKING ALONE

WITH A DIGRESSION ON LONDON WALKING

Walking alone is, of course, on a much lower moral plane than walking in

company. It falls under the general ban on individual as opposed to

communal pursuits. The solitary walker, like the golfer or sculler, is a

selfish and limited being, unlike the rower, footballer, or cricketer,

who is a member of a community. The point cannot be seriously argued.

Prevaricators may call attention artlessly to certain features of

communal pursuits--to cricket scores and lists of averages and

interviews with eminent athletes; they may even review our country as a

whole, and expatiate on the widely diffused spirit of toleration, mutual

good-will, and readiness to co-operate which our national sports have

produced. But their gibes are unavailing: it is plainly better to do

things in company than alone: and the solitary walker, if he is honest,

will at once resign all claim to the halo of patriotism, disinterested

devotion, esprit de corps and good citizenship which encircles the brow

of the footballer.

I will not even pray in aid the great names of Stevenson and Hazlitt.

Their defence of solitary walking rested largely on the mistaken idea

that if you walk in company you are bound to talk; they did not realise

that even silence can be corporate, nay, that there is a concrete and

positive taciturnity of two far more satisfying than the negative

voicelessness of one. They did not know how grunts can reveal the man

and ejaculations create and foster friendship. The silent contemplation

of walking is aided, not hindered, by the presence of another silent

contemplator at your side.

Walking alone, then, is a thing only to be justified by special

circumstances; it is an abnormal function of life, a subject for

pathology rather than physiology. But as life is not yet quite perfect

and normal in all departments, there is a place for pathology: as the

proper circumstances of walking are not always attainable, there is a

place for walking alone. Without elaborating a scheme of casuistry, we

can imagine certain conditions under which walking alone is defensible

if not laudable; and it is only fair to the solitary walker, pursuing

his lonely way under the ban of moral disapproval, to indicate some of

these.

I have mentioned above four classes of walkers--six milers, twelve

milers, eighteen milers, and twenty-four milers. The figures are not to

be taken too literally; but I think walkers, as a whole, fall more or

less definitely into four groups, whose average daily maxima are at, or

near, these figures. The differences extend to other points--to pace, to

length of stride, even, I think, to opinions and disposition, although

here the classification becomes less definite. Class A, the twenty-four

milers, average about 4½ miles an hour on a good road, and stride 40

inches or over: they tend to be mugwumps, mistrusters of rhetoric,

lovers of the classic in art and music and literature, of the distilled

and clarified products of human imagination or insight. Class B, the

eighteen milers, average 4 miles an hour, and stride 36 inches: they are

generally those who might have been in Class A but for a lack of real

comprehensive capacity and for a love of talking and disputation: they

tend to spasmodic intensities within a limited area instead of the wide

and equable appreciation of Class A: they read Meredith, but talk about

his philosophy, and have no proper grasp of Dickens. Class C, average 3½

miles an hour and call it ‘about 4,’ and stride 30 inches: they often

have Class A capacities, but are physically disabled: they insist on

large meals and a good deal of drink, and talk much of ‘scorching.’

Class D, average 2½ miles an hour, and stride 25 inches: they have no

illusions about either, and are mainly occupied in catching a train home

at the earliest opportunity.

Now it is obvious that if a Class B walker is set down to walk with one

from Class D, one of two things must happen: either the D man must rise

above his normal maxima, or the B man must sink below them. The usual

supposition is that B must give way, on the ground that it is dangerous

and distressing for D to exceed his limits. It is not generally

recognised in such cases what a sacrifice is imposed on B. He has got to

drop his pace from 4 miles to 2½; he has got to shorten his stride from

36 to 25 inches; he will probably not be allowed to talk politics; D has

never read Meredith’s poetry, and by the time B is feeling a little

warm, D will be beginning to think about the trains home. Now suppose

that B has had a hard week’s work, is mentally confused, is

contemplating marriage or an investment, is just changing his politics

or metaphysics, or is in some other condition when his mind wants

cleaning up and straightening out: would he not be to some extent

justified in refusing to modify his distance, pace, and stride, and in

offering D the alternatives of either complying with the B conditions or

going to the D--that is, consorting with other members of his own class?

Those who hold that B would not be justified miss, I think, the

distinction between walking and strolling; they consider that B will

get some sort of motion through pleasant country, and that this ought to

be enough for him, whatever his condition. The instance taken is

purposely extreme; normally, it is admitted, a stroll in company is

better than a walk alone. But there are times when B must have a proper

walk, at whatever cost; when his primary need is for 18 miles at 4 miles

an hour; nay, there are times when he is simply not fit for company, and

must go walking alone, and recapture something of himself before he can

properly consort with his fellows.

This condition of B’s which justifies solitary walking is called by many

names in medical works or in the impassioned autobiographies of

advertisement--neurasthenia, brain-fag, nervous collapse, or even

Weltschmerz. But there is a better and more expressive name, covering a

larger range of symptoms, which popular idiom created for us, and a poet

then marked for ever as our own. I mean the Hump. The use of this phrase

illustrates once more the truth that once we are conscious of a thing we

have subdued it. When a man says he has neurasthenia, he understands

nothing except a vague sense of discomfort somewhere unlocalised in

himself: but when he says he has the Hump, the very word brings a clear

vision of something unnatural and extraneous, of a definite deformity

which he can attack and cure. The disease is isolated and identified,

and is no longer a vague oppression; it is something which is not his

real self, but is temporarily connected with him, and may, by an effort,

be shaken off. Civilisation has pressed too heavily on one part of him,

on his porter’s shoulder-knot; and the forces of his being, which should

be employed in varying ways on different tasks, have concentrated

themselves unnaturally to resist the pressure: his shoulder has become

hypertrophied: in short, he has the Hump. Let him take a walk, let his

being resume its natural course: let the forces settle instinctively

back into their natural channels: let him realise the world around and

about him, calling and answering to each of his separate faculties and

not to one only; and lo! the pressure is lightened, the Hump is

reduced, and he resumes his natural shape, and is fit for the company

of his fellows.

And then you will find that the sun and the wind,

And the Djinn of the garden too,

Have lifted that Hump, that horrible Hump,

The Hump that was black and blue.

The poet, it is true, wrote of the Hump that comes from having too

little to do: but his words apply equally to that which comes of too

much.

But it is not only abnormal mental conditions, such as the Hump, which

justify solitary walking: there are abnormal physical conditions which

at times render it necessary. Chief among these are the peculiar

conditions of streets, pavements, and aggregated humanity which make up

towns. Walking in company in a town is really a mockery. Not only are

you hampered by other people, so that your attention is kept perpetually

on them and off your companions: but your line is for ever being broken

and reuniting, so that there is no chance of developing a communal swing

and stride. Worse than that, the atmosphere of a town induces that

dangerous combination of physical oppression and mental activity which

leads to brilliant conversation: you shout epigrams across the roar of

the traffic, and coruscate with wit as you dodge among perambulators.

Town-walking in company, in fact, tends to become like an evening party,

and the only possible thing in a town is to walk alone.

This being so, it may be asked whether town-walking is worth doing at

all. Many people would say that it is not, and as regards the great

majority of towns I should agree with them; the only thing to be done

with such towns is to walk away from them as quickly as possible, and to

achieve this it is pardonable to undergo the degradation of bicycling or

even being driven in a vehicle. But there is one exception, and that is

London. London walking is a quite distinct and peculiar thing, utterly

unlike any other town-walking. It is a unique branch of walking in

general and solitary walking in particular: for all the circumstances

which make town-walking solitary apply tenthousandfold in London. But if

you accept this condition, and walk London alone, you will find a very

curious thing, namely that in this biggest and most monstrous of all

towns you approach most nearly to pure rusticity. The strictly physical

conditions, dirt, noise, smell, constriction of outlook, multiplicity of

people, are as bad or worse in London than other towns; but in certain

other points, by no means unimportant to a walker, the end of the series

is like the beginning, the infinite is like the infinitesimal. What was

possible on the South Downs, difficult in Cheltenham, and unthinkable in

Liverpool, becomes possible again in London.

It all springs from one simple fact: there are so many people in London

that they do not notice each other. If the Londoner paid the slightest

attention to his neighbour he would go mad in a fortnight. It is

physically impossible for him to notice every one he sees; consequently,

he gets into the habit of simply overlooking them, and as their _esse_

is _percipi_, they become, for practical purposes, not there. A Londoner

walking along a crowded street is really alone in the wilderness: the

men are simply as trees walking. The difference between walking along

Oxford Street and along the Embankment is only the difference between

walking through a copse where there are many trees or on a field track

where there are few.

From this two important consequences follow; first, that in London you

can wear what you please. No one will notice or criticise, and even if

they did there are always a hundred people worse dressed than you, with

dirtier boots, with more _négligé_ hats, with baggier trousers. You may,

of course, meet some one you know; but here again the abnormal size of

London comes to your aid. If it is 5 to 1 on meeting a friend in

Cheltenham, it is 50 to 1 against in London. Second, and even more

important, is the fact that in London you can sing in the streets. The

roar of the traffic will drown all but the strongest passages in the

highest register: and even if this lulls for a moment nobody will

notice. You can even conduct with your stick if the beat of your foot is

not enough. Difficult orchestral passages with variations of colour can

be safely attempted in London streets: even the difference between a

trumpet and a horn (which involves making faces if it is done properly)

can be represented without any one heeding you.

Traversing thus the London streets, singing and in comfortable clothes,

unheeding and unheeded by other people, the solitary walker can come

near to, if he cannot attain, the proper mood of walking. It is true

that a crowd may disturb his repose at times, and dodging the people and

the traffic may break the rhythm of his stride: but the sixth sense

which Londoners develop enables him to avoid most obstructions without

thinking, and it is surprising, as a matter of fact, how rarely one’s

stride is broken in a London street. The rhythm of street walking can

never be quite the same as the rhythm of country walking: there is

always something hard and metallic in the contact of foot and paved

surface. None the less, there is a rhythm, and it can do something

towards pacifying the body, enlarging the mind, and beating the

disordered discourse of intellect into the smooth series of

contemplation. Here again the mere size of London comes to the solitary

walker’s aid. It is large enough to give him the feeling of direction,

to feed his innate craving for big lines. True, in London as in other

towns you have frequently to make a sharp turn, giving a violent wrench

to your internal organ of orientation. But if your main line be a

sufficiently big one, as it can be in London, it is possible to regard

these turns as temporary irregularities, and merge them in a larger

whole. For example, as you go from Charing Cross to Chelsea, you start

with a piece of the Strand, turn a little to cut across the lower end of

Trafalgar Square and out into the Mall, and then swing round to the

left, to the right, again to the right and again to the left, before you

resume the big line of the King’s Road.[6] But if you envisage the

whole in a sufficiently large spirit, the little irregularity of

Trafalgar Square and the four turns necessitated by the intrusion of

Buckingham Palace need not trouble you; they are mere modern

excrescences on a line which must have existed before Buckingham Palace

was built or Trafalgar fought, the line by which the citizens of London

went to Chelsea to eat buns.

By walking in this way along big lines it is possible to gain some real

idea of London, the relations of its parts, and the characteristic of

each. The bus or cab-rider cannot really understand London: by allowing

himself to be carried he loses all grip of actuality. The underground

traveller is even more benighted: to him London is an unintelligible

congeries of districts linked by memories of the under world. He

conceives Hampstead Heath as something near Hampstead station--an awful

perversion. But the walker realises Hampstead Heath in its relation to

London; he has approached it through the drab monochrome vistas of

Camden Town (with the sudden leap into modernity, red brick, and green

blinds at the lower end of the heath) or along the pompous and

innocently self-satisfied High Street, or up the interminable sameness

of Fitz John’s Avenue. He knows Parliament Hill as the end of an hour’s

hard walk, from which he looks back over the way that he has come: he

knows the cattle-trough as the first landmark in Alf Holliday’s famous

walk out of London to St. Albans, which drops him over the Spaniard’s

Road into a new world, with a high ridge between him and London, twists

him deftly through Temple Fortune, takes him into Hendon the back way by

the recreation ground, and speeds him from the foot of the hill across

the thirteen fields traversed by the river Silk, where a man can stretch

his legs and forget all urban things awhile until confronted by the

imposing structure of the Hendon Union workhouse.

But the greatest and most inspiring thing in London is the river. On the

purely physical side, it ventilates the town as nothing else can do; on

the most stifling days, when stone and brick have been so heated

overnight that they have killed the freshness of dawn and brought the

new day to birth already old, when the feet are as lead and every breath

is an oppression, when the most congenial music is a symphony of

Tschaikowsky--there is still some freshness beside the river. On the

aesthetic side, who shall fitly sing the praises of the river, with the

morning sun catching it as one drops on to the embankment from the

north, the silver mornings when the air is clear, the gold mornings with

a slight fog, and the copper mornings with a thicker fog? Or the

November view up river at sunset from one of the Chelsea bridges? But

the best gift of the river to London is simply itself, the long curving

line on which the whole town is based, which links Fulham to Westminster

and Battersea to the Docks, which shapes as nothing else can shape the

walker’s conception of London. Give me the man that knows his bridges

and has walked the whole range of all the embankments, from Blackfriars

to the uttermost parts of Chelsea beneath the shadow of the four

chimneys; he alone is the true Londoner.

It is clear then that at least in London there is something to be said

for solitary walking; the London walker can come near to the mood of

true walking. If he is debarred from real country he can yet gain

something of the country conditions; though a townsman, he approaches in

many ways to rusticity. A curious confirmation of this view may be found

in the Local Government system of this country. While every other town

has its Borough Council, London has a County Council; on the South Downs

you are in a county, in Liverpool you are in a borough, but in London

you are in a county again. In the eye of the Local Government Board, we

Londoners are mere chawbacons; we are tending sheep, and sowing corn,

and abiding the verdict of the seasons; we dwell beneath our own

vine-trees, and wait for a chance traveller to come by and tell us

whether Ladysmith is relieved. There is much humanity in Acts of

Parliament.

* * * * *

But however much we may make of London walking, let it never be

considered as anything but a _pis aller_. The first principle of all

walkers who live in London is to get away, if possible. If you must

remain in London, walk there by all means, and trump up whatever defence

of it looks most plausible. But as soon as it becomes possible to get

away, do not dream for an instant of remaining; beside a real country

walk, the biggest London line, the finest view from the Embankment, the

most transcendental conception of Hampstead are as dust in the balance.

Have done with all such flummery; take your stick and your Walker Miles

and go. And, unless you have the hump, do not go alone. Walking _from_

London (as opposed to walking _in_ London) is one of the finest forms of

communal walking; as an education in citizenship it need fear no

comparison, whether with cricket, football, or any other organised

game.

Consider for a moment the qualities needed by one who has undertaken the

organisation of a party of walkers--if a mixed party, so much the

better. To perform his functions successfully he must be a combination

of Cook’s agent, weather-prophet, geographical specialist, Bradshaw

expert, commissariat officer, guide, nurse, hostess, and chaperon. First

he must arrange the day and time, and train, so as to suit everybody,

which involves a hail of postcards, telephone conversations, and

personal interviews. Then he must provide a fine day--by far his easiest

task. Then he must arrange the route, his choice being limited only by

the fact that each member of the party has his own views about pace,

distance, time for lunch, and character of country, agreeing only that

there must be no undue hurrying or waiting for the train home at the end

of the walk. Then his functions as guide begin: he must necessarily lead

the party, while keeping an eye behind to see that no one is straggling;

he must never show even a momentary hesitation as to the route; he must

receive with gratitude and attention the suggestions of his companions,

who don’t care about the map, but are sure they came that way with their

uncle some years ago, and are quite certain the guide is wrong; he must

watch the time all through, making painful mental calculations of rates

and distances; he must be sure, if the route passes any ancient

churches, public-houses, or registry offices, that no members of the

party whose tastes incline thereto linger too long with irretrievable

results; and unless and until the party have reached a proper

taciturnity, he must originate and stimulate interesting conversation.

If the walk continues into the late afternoon--as it will if the leader

has an ounce of sporting instinct--he must find a suitable place for tea

at exactly the right time, and finally march his party down to their

train with not more than five minutes to wait.

Many walkers when guiding a party prefer to stick to familiar routes,

and so lessen some of the difficulties; but, if this plan is safer, it

misses some of the most exciting moments of walking in company. There is

nothing in life quite like guiding a company against time across

unknown or dimly remembered country. With a map it is stimulating

enough; but it is perhaps even more fun with Walker Miles. For the

leader feels that not only himself but also Walker Miles is on his

trial; he has to justify to the company not only his own intelligence,

but also that of his master. And he knows that tracks may have been

changed or landmarks moved, and that a passage is just coming in the

text which requires careful attention to make certain of the master’s

meaning. He turns the critical corner at the dividing of the ways, and

has to decide instantly and without hesitation on the right route. He

chooses one, and looks ahead to the next point in the text which marks a

decisive point--a fork in the road, or a stile in the hedge. Time passes

and the track continues, every yard more fatal if the last turn was

wrong. And then in a sudden glory the track forks or the stile appears;

the master is justified; and with something of the feeling of Wellington

when Blucher appeared, or Euclid when the forty-seventh proposition

worked out, he brushes the doubt and anxiety of the past from his mind,

and hurls himself joyously on the next problem.

* * * * *

Walking essays · 第 10 / 11 段