XVI.--GEORGE MEREDITH

(1) THE EGOIST

George Meredith, as his friends used to tell one with amusement, was a

vain man. Someone has related how, in his later years, he regarded it as a

matter of extreme importance that his visitors should sit in a position

from which they would see his face in profile. This is symbolic of his

attitude to the world. All his life he kept one side of his face hidden.

Mr. Ellis, who is the son of one of Meredith's cousins, now takes us for a

walk round Meredith's chair. No longer are we permitted to remain in

restful veneration of "a god and a Greek." Mr. Ellis invites us--and we

cannot refuse the invitation--to look at the other side of the face, to

consider the full face and the back of the head. He encourages us to feel

Meredith's bumps, and no man whose bumps we are allowed to feel can

continue for five minutes the pretence of being an Olympian. He becomes a

human being under a criticizing thumb. We discover that he had a genius

for imposture, an egoist's temper, and a stomach that fluttered greedily

at the thought of dainty dishes. We find all those characteristics that

prevented him from remaining on good terms first with his father, next

with his wife, and then with his son. At first, when one reads the full

story of Meredith's estrangements through three generations, one has the

feeling that one is in the presence of an idol in ruins. Certainly, one

can never mistake Box Hill for Olympus again. On the other hand, let us

but have time to accustom ourselves to see Meredith in other aspects than

that which he himself chose to present to his contemporaries--let us begin

to see in him not so much one of the world's great comic censors, as one

of the world's great comic subjects, and we shall soon find ourselves back

among his books, reading them no longer with tedious awe, but with a new

passion of interest in the figure-in-the-background of the complex human

being who wrote them.

For Meredith was his own great subject. Had he been an Olympian he could

not have written _The Egoist_ or _Harry Richmond_. He was an egoist and

pretender, coming of a line of egoists and pretenders, and his novels are

simply the confession and apology of such a person. Meredith concealed the

truth about himself in his daily conversation; he revealed it in his

novels. He made such a mystery about his birth that many people thought he

was a cousin of Queen Victoria's or at least a son of Bulwer Lytton's. It

was only in _Evan Harrington_ that he told the essentials of the truth

about the tailor's shop in Portsmouth above which he was born. Outside his

art, nothing would persuade him to own up to the tailor's shop. Once, when

Mr. Clodd was filling in a census-paper for him, Meredith told him to put

"near Petersfield" as his place of birth. The fact that he was born at

Portsmouth was not publicly known, indeed, until some time after his

death. And not only was there the tailor's shop to live down, but on his

mother's side he was the grandson of a publican, Michael Macnamara.

Meredith liked to boast that his mother was "pure Irish"--an exaggeration,

according to Mr. Ellis--but he said nothing about Michael Macnamara of

"The Vine." At the same time it was the presence not of a bar sinister but

of a yardstick sinister in his coat of arms that chiefly filled him with

shame. When he was marrying his first wife he wrote "Esquire" in the

register as a description of his father's profession. There is no

evidence, apparently, as to whether Meredith himself ever served in the

tailor's shop after his father moved from Portsmouth to St. James's

Street, London. Nothing is known of his life during the two years after

his return from the Moravian school at Neuwied. As for his hapless father

(who had been trained as a medical student but went into the family

business in order to save it from ruin), he did not succeed in London any

better than in Portsmouth, and in 1849 he emigrated to South Africa and

opened a shop in Cape Town. It was while in Cape Town that he read

Meredith's ironical comedy on the family tailordom, _Evan Harrington; or

He Would be a Gentleman_. Naturally, he regarded the book (in which his

father and himself were two of the chief figures) with horror. It was as

though George had washed the family tape-measure in public. Augustus

Meredith, no less than George, blushed for the tape-measure daily.

Probably, Melchizedek Meredith, who begat Augustus, who begat George, had

also blushed for it in his day. As the "great Mel" in _Evan Harrington_ he

is an immortal figure of genteel imposture. His lordly practice of never

sending in a bill was hardly that of a man who accepted the conditions of

his trade. In _Evan Harrington_ three generations of a family's shame were

held up to ridicule. No wonder that Augustus Meredith, when he was

congratulated by a customer on his son's fame, turned away silently with a

look of pain.

The comedy of the Meredith family springs, of course, not from the fact

that they were tailors, but that they pretended not to be tailors. Whether

Meredith himself was more ashamed of their tailoring or their

pretentiousness it is not easy to decide. Both _Evan Harrington_ and

_Harry Richmond_ are in a measure, comedies of imposture, in which the

vice of imposture is lashed as fiercely as Molière lashes the vice of

hypocrisy in _Tartuffe_. But it may well be that in life Meredith was a

snob, while in art he was a critic of snobs. Mr. Yeats, in his last book

of prose, put forward the suggestion that the artist reveals in his art

not his "self" (which is expressed in his life), but his "anti-self," a

complementary and even contrary self. He might find in the life and works

of Meredith some support for his not quite convincing theory. Meredith was

an egoist in his life, an anti-egoist in his books. He was pretentious in

his life, anti-pretentious in his books. He took up the attitude of the

wronged man in his life; he took up the case of the wronged woman in his

books. In short, his life was vehemently pro-George-Meredith, while his

books were vehemently anti-George-Meredith. He knew himself more

thoroughly, so far as we can discover from his books, than any other

English novelist has ever done.

He knew himself comically, no doubt, rather than tragically. In _Modern

Love_ and _Richard Feverel_ he reveals himself as by no means a laughing

philosopher; but he strove to make fiction a vehicle of philosophic

laughter rather than of passionate sympathy. Were it not that a great

poetic imagination is always at work--in his prose, perhaps, even more

than in his verse--his genius might seem a little cold and

head-in-the-air. But his poet's joy in his characters saves his books from

inhumanity. As Diana Warwick steps out in the dawn she is not a mere

female human being undergoing critical dissection; she is bird-song and

the light of morning and the coming of the flowers. Meredith had as great

a capacity for rapture as for criticism and portraiture. He has expressed

in literature as no other novelist has done the rapturous vision of a boy

in love. He knew that a boy in love is not mainly a calf but a poet. _Love

in a Valley_ is the incomparable music of a boy's ecstasy. Much of

_Richard Feverel_ is its incomparable prose. Rapture and criticism,

however, make a more practical combination in literature than in life. In

literature, criticism may add flavour to rapture; in life it is more than

likely to destroy the flavour. One is not surprised, then, to learn the

full story of Meredith's first unhappy marriage. A boy of twenty-one, he

married a widow of thirty, high-strung, hot and satirical like himself;

and after a depressing sequence of dead babies, followed by the birth of a

son who survived, she found life with a man of genius intolerable, and ran

away with a painter. Meredith apparently refused her request to go and see

her when she was dying. His imaginative sympathy enabled him to see the

woman's point of view in poetry and fiction; it does not seem to have

extended to his life. Thus, his biography is to a great extent a

"showing-up" of George Meredith. He proved as incapable of keeping the

affection of his son Arthur, as of keeping that of his wife. Much as he

loved the boy he had not been married again long before he allowed him to

become an alien presence. The boy felt he had a grievance. He

said--probably without justice--that his father kept him short of money.

Possibly he was jealous for his dead mother's sake. Further, though put

into business, he had literary ambitions--a prolific source of bitterness.

When Arthur died, Meredith did not even attend his funeral.

Mr. Ellis has shown Meredith up not only as a husband and a father, but as

a hireling journalist and a lark-devouring gourmet. On the whole, the poet

who could eat larks in a pie seems to me to be a more shocking "great man"

than the Radical who could write Tory articles in a newspaper for pay. At

the same time, it is only fair to say that Meredith remains a sufficiently

splendid figure in. Mr. Ellis's book even when we know the worst about

him. Was his a generous genius? It was at least a prodigal one. As poet,

novelist, correspondent, and conversationalist, he leaves an impression of

beauty, wit, and power in a combination without a precedent.

(2) THE OLYMPIAN UNBENDS

Lady Butcher's charming _Memoirs of George Meredith_ is admittedly written

in reply to Mr. Ellis's startling volume. It seems to me, however, that it

is a supplement rather than a reply. Mr. Ellis was not quite fair to

Meredith as a man, but he enabled us to understand the limitations which

were the conditions of Meredith's peculiar genius. Many readers were

shocked by the suggestion that characters, like countries, must have

boundaries. Where Mr. Ellis failed, in my opinion, was not in drawing

these as carefully as possible, but in the rather unfriendly glee with

which, one could not help feeling, he did so. It is also true that he

missed some of the grander mountain-peaks in Meredith's character. Lady

Butcher, on the other hand, is far less successful than Mr. Ellis in

drawing a portrait which makes us feel that now we understand something of

the events that gave birth to _The Egoist_ and _Richard Feverel_ and

_Modern Love_. Her book tells us nothing of the seed-time of genius, but

is a delightful account of its autumn.

At the same time it helps to dissipate one ridiculous popular fallacy

about Meredith. Meredith, like most all the wits, has been accused of

straining after image and epigram. Wit acts as an irritant on many people.

They forget the admirable saying of Coleridge: "Exclusive of the abstract

sciences, the largest and worthiest portion of our knowledge consists of

aphorisms; and the greatest of men is but an aphorism." They might as well

denounce a hedge for producing wild roses or a peacock for growing tail

feathers with pretty eyes as a witty writer for flowering into aphorism,

epigram and image. Even so artificial a writer as Wilde had not to labour

to be witty. It has often been laid to his charge that his work smells of

the lamp, whereas what is really the matter with it is that it smells of

the drawing-room gas. It was the result of too much "easy-goingness," not

of too much strain. As for Meredith, his wit was the wit of an abounding

imagination. Lady Butcher gives some delightful examples of it. He could

not see a baby in long robes without a witty image leaping into his mind.

He said he adored babies "in the comet stage."

Of a lady of his acquaintance he said: "She is a woman who has never had

the first tadpole wriggle of an idea," adding, "She has a mind as clean

and white and flat as a plate: there are no eminences in it." Lady Butcher

tells of a picnic-party on Box Hill at which Meredith was one of the

company. "After our picnic ... it came on to rain, and as we drearily

trudged down the hill with cloaks and umbrellas, and burdened with our tea

baskets, Mr. Meredith, with a grimace, called out to a passing friend:

'Behold! the funeral of picnic!'"

If Meredith is to some extent an obscure author, it is clear that this was

not due to his over-reaching himself in laborious efforts after wit. His

obscurity is not that of a man straining after expression, but the

obscurity of a man deliberately hiding something. Meredith believed in

being as mysterious as an oracle. He assumed the Olympian manner, and

objected to being mistaken for a frequenter of the market-place. He was

impatient of ordinary human witlessness, and spoke to his fellows, not as

man to man, but as Apollo from his seat. This was probably a result of the

fact that his mind marched much too fast for the ordinary man to keep pace

with it. "How I leaped through leagues of thought when I could walk!" he

once said when he had lost the power of his legs. Such buoyancy of the

imagination and intellect separated him more and more from a world in

which most of the athletics are muscular, not mental; and he began to take

a malicious pleasure in exaggerating the difference that already existed

between himself and ordinary mortals. He dressed his genius in a

mannerism, and, as he leaped through his leagues of thought, the flying

skirts of his mannerism were all that the average reader panting

desperately after him could see. Shakespeare and the greatest men of

genius are human enough to wait for us, and give us time to recover our

breath. Meredith, however, was a proud man, and a mocker.

In the ordinary affairs of life, Lady Butcher tells us, he was so proud

that it was difficult to give him even trifling gifts. "I remember," she

says, "bringing him two silver flat poached-egg spoons from Norway, and he

implored me to take them back with me to London, and looked much relieved

when I consented to do so!" He would always "prefer to bestow rather than

to accept gifts." Lady Butcher, replying to the charge that he was

ungrateful, suggests that "no one should expect an eagle to be grateful."

But then, neither can one love an eagle, and one would like to be able to

love the author of _Love in a Valley_ and _Richard Feverel_. Meredith was

too keenly aware what an eagle he was. Speaking of the reviewers who had

attacked him, he said: "They have always been abusing me. I have been

observing them. It is the crueller process." It is quite true, but it was

a superior person who said it.

Meredith, however, among his friends and among the young, loses this air

of superiority, and becomes something of a radiant romp as well as an

Olympian. Lady Butcher's first meeting with him took place when she was a

girl of thirteen. She was going up Box Hill to see the sun rise with a

sixteen-year-old cousin, when the latter said: "I know a madman who lives

on Box Hill. He's quite mad, but very amusing; he likes walks and

sunrises. Let's go and shout him up!" It does Meredith credit that he got

out of bed and joined them, "his nightshirt thrust into brown trousers."

Even when the small girl insisted on "reading aloud to him one of the

hymns from Keble's _Christian Year_," he did not, as the saying is, turn a

hair. His attachment to his daughter Mariette--his "dearie girl," as he

spoke of her with unaffected softness of phrase--also helps one to

realize that he was not all Olympian. Meredith, the condemner of the

"guarded life," was humanly nervous in guarding his own little daughter.

"He would never allow Mariette to travel alone, even the very short

distance by train from Box Hill to Ewell; a maid had always to be sent

with her or to fetch her. He never allowed her to walk by herself." One

likes Meredith the better for Lady Butcher's picture of him as a "harassed

father."

One likes him, too, as he converses with his dogs, and for his

thoughtfulness in giving some of his MSS., including that of _Richard

Feverel_, to Frank Cole, his gardener, in the hope that "some day the

gardener would be able to sell them" and so get some reward for his

devotion. As to the underground passages in Meredith's life and character,

Lady Butcher is not concerned with them. She writes of him merely as she

knew him. Her book is a friend's tribute, though not a blind tribute. It

may not be effective as an argument against those who are bent on

disparaging the greatest lyrical wit in modern English literature. But it

will be welcomed by those for whom Meredith's genius is still a bubbling

spring of good sense and delight.

(3) THE ANGLO-IRISH ASPECT

Meredith never wrote a novel which was less a novel than _Celt and Saxon_.

It is only a fragment of a book. It is so much a series of essays and

sharp character-sketches, however, that the untimely fall of the curtain

does not greatly trouble us. There is no excitement of plot, no gripping

anxiety as to whether this or that pair of lovers will ever reach the

altar. Philip O'Donnell and Patrick, his devoted brother, and their

caricature relative, the middle-aged Captain Con, all interest us as they

abet each other in the affairs of love or politics, or as they discuss

their native country or the temperament of the country which oppresses it;

but they are chiefly desirable as performers in an Anglo-Irish fantasia, a

Meredithian piece of comic music, with various national anthems, English,

Welsh, and Irish, running through and across it in all manner of guises,

and producing all manner of agreeable disharmonies.

In the beginning we have Patrick O'Donnell, an enthusiast, a Celt, a

Catholic, setting out for the English mansion of the father of Adiante

Adister to find if the girl cannot be pleaded over to reconsider her

refusal of his brother Philip. He arrives in the midst of turmoil in the

house, the cause of it being a hasty marriage which Adiante had

ambitiously contracted with a hook-nosed foreign prince. Patrick, a

broken-hearted proxy, successfully begs her family for a miniature of the

girl to take back to his brother, but he falls so deeply in love with her

on seeing the portrait that his loyalty to Philip almost wavers, when the

latter carelessly asks him to leave the miniature on a more or less public

table instead of taking it off to the solitude of his own room for a long

vigil of adoration.

In the rest of the story we have an account of the brothers in the London

house of Captain Con, the happy husband married to a stark English wife of

mechanical propriety--a rebellious husband, too, when in the sociable

atmosphere of his own upper room, amid the blackened clay pipes and the

friendly fumes of whiskey, he sings her praises, while at the same time

full of grotesque and whimsical criticisms of all those things, Saxon and

more widely human, for which she stands. There is a touch of farce in the

relations of these two, aptly symbolized by the bell which rings for

Captain Con, and hastens him away from his midnight eloquence with Patrick

and Philip. "He groaned, 'I must go. I haven't heard the tinkler for

months. It signifies she's cold in her bed. The thing called circulation

is unknown to her save by the aid of outward application, and I'm the

warming-pan, as legitimately as I should be, I'm her husband and her

Harvey in one.'"

It is in the house of Captain Con, it should be added, that Philip and

Patrick meet Jane Mattock, the Saxon woman; and the story as we have it

ends with Philip invalided home from service in India, and Jane, a victim

of love, catching "glimpses of the gulfs of bondage, delicious,

rose-enfolded, foreign." There are nearly three hundred pages of it

altogether, some of them as fantastic and lyrical as any that Meredith

ever wrote.

As one reads _Celt and Saxon_, however, one seems to get an inkling of the

reason why Meredith has so often been set down as an obscure author. It is

not entirely that he is given to using imagery as the language of

explanation--a subtle and personal sort of hieroglyphics. It is chiefly, I

think, because there is so little direct painting of men and women in his

books. Despite his lyricism, he had something of an X-ray's imagination.

The details of the modelling of a face, the interpreting lines and looks,

did not fix themselves with preciseness on his vision enabling him to pass

them on to us with the surface reality we generally demand in prose

fiction.

It is as though he painted some of his men and women upon air: they are

elusive for all we know of their mental and spiritual processes. Even

though he is at pains to tell us that Diana's hair is dark, we do not at

once accept the fact but are at liberty to go on believing she is a fair

woman, for he himself was general rather than insistently particular in

his vision of such matters. In the present book, again, we have a glimpse

of Adiante in her miniature--"this lighted face, with the dark raised eyes

and abounding auburn tresses, where the contrast of colours was in itself

thrilling," "the light above beauty distinguishing its noble classic lines

and the energy of radiance, like a morning of chivalrous promise, in the

eyes"--and, despite the details mentioned, the result is to give us only

the lyric aura of the woman where we wanted a design.

Ultimately, these women of Meredith's become intensely real to us--the

most real women, I think, in English fiction--but, before we come to

handshaking terms with them, we have sometimes to go to them over bogs and

rocky places with the sun in our eyes. Before this, physically, they are

apt to be exquisite parts of a landscape, sharers of a lyric beauty with

the cherry-trees and the purple crocuses.

Coming to the substance of the book--the glance from many sides at the

Irish and English temperaments--we find Meredith extremely penetrating in

his criticism of John Bullishness, but something of a foreigner in his

study of the Irish character. The son of an Irishwoman, he chose an

Irishwoman as his most conquering heroine, but he writes of the race as

one who has known the men and women of it entirely, or almost entirely, in

an English setting--a setting, in other words, which shows up their

strangeness and any surface eccentricities they may have, but does not

give us an ordinary human sense of them. Captain Con is vital, because

Meredith imagined him vitally, but when all is said and done, he is

largely a stage-Irishman, winking over his whiskey that has paid no

excise--a better-born relative of Captain Costigan.

Politically, _Celt and Saxon_ seems to be a plea for Home Rule--Home Rule,

with a view towards a "consolidation of the union." Its diagnosis of the

Irish difficulty is one which has long been popular with many intellectual

men on this side of the Irish Sea. Meredith sees, as the roots of the

trouble, misunderstanding, want of imagination, want of sympathy. It has

always seemed curious to me that intelligent men could persuade themselves

that Ireland was chiefly suffering from want of understanding and want of

sympathy on the part of England, when all the time her only ailment has

been want of liberty. To adapt the organ-grinder's motto,

Sympathy without relief

Is like mustard without beef.

As a matter of fact, Meredith realized this, and was a friend to many

Irish national movements from the Home Rule struggle down to the Gaelic

League, to the latter of which the Irish part of him sent a subscription a

year or two ago. He saw things from the point of view of an Imperial

Liberal idealist, however, not of a Nationalist. In the result, he did not

know the every-day and traditional setting of Irish life sufficiently well

to give us an Irish Nationalist central figure as winning and heroic, even

in his extravagances, as, say, the patriotic Englishman, Neville

Beauchamp.

At the same time, one must be thankful for a book so obviously the work of

a great abundant mind--a mind giving out its criticisms like flutters of

birds--a heroic intellect always in the service of an ideal liberty,

courage, and gracious manners--a characteristically island brain, that was

yet not insular.

The Art of Letters · 第 45 / 55 题