Art Schools and University College
WHEN ALL GILBERT'S friends were at Oxford or Cambridge, he used to
say how glad he was that his own choice had been a different one. He
never sighed for Oxford. He never regretted his rather curious
experiences at an Art School--two Art Schools really, although he
only talks of one in the _Autobiography_, for he was for a short time
at a School of Art in St. John's Wood (Calderon's, Lawrence Solomon
thought), whence he passed to the Slade School. He was there from
1892 to 1895 and during part of that time he attended lectures on
English Literature at University College.
The chapter on the experiences of the next two years is called in the
_Autobiography_, "How to be a Lunatic," and there is no doubt that
these years were crucial and at times crucifying in Gilbert's life.
During a happily prolonged youth (he was now eighteen and a half) he
had developed very slowly, but normally. Surrounded by pleasant
friendships and home influences he had never really become aware of
evil. Now it broke upon him suddenly--probably to a degree
exaggerated by his strong imagination and distorted by the fact that
he was undergoing physical changes usually belonging to an earlier
age.
Towards the end of his school life Gilbert's voice had not yet
broken. His mother took him to a doctor to be overhauled and was told
that his brain was the largest and most sensitive the doctor had ever
seen. "A genius or an idiot" was his verdict on the probabilities.
Above all things she was told to avoid for him any sort of shock.
Physically, mentally, spiritually he was on a very large scale and
probably for that reason of a slow rate of development. The most
highly differentiated organisms are the slowest to mature, and
without question Gilbert did mature very late. He was now passing
through the stage described by Keats: "The imagination of a boy is
healthy and the mature imagination of a man is healthy; but there is
a space of life between"--a period unhealthy or at least ill-focussed.
Intellectually Gilbert suffered at this time from an extreme
scepticism. As he expressed it he "felt as if everything might be a
dream" as if he had "projected the universe from within." The
agnostic doubts the existence of God. Gilbert at moments doubted the
existence of the agnostic.
Morally his temptations seem to have been in some strange psychic
region rather than merely physical. The whole period is best
summarised in a passage from the _Autobiography_, for looking back
after forty years Gilbert still saw it as deeply and darkly
significant: as both a mental and moral extreme of danger.
There is something truly menacing in the thought of how quickly I
could imagine the maddest, when I had never committed the mildest
crime . . . there was a time when I had reached that condition of
moral anarchy within, in which a man says, in the words of Wilde,
that "Atys with the blood-stained knife were better than the thing I
am." I have never indeed felt the faintest temptation to the
particular madness of Wilde, but I could at this time imagine the
worst and wildest disproportions and distortions of more normal
passion; the point is that the whole mood was overpowered and
oppressed with a sort of congestion of imagination. As Bunyan, in his
morbid period, described himself as prompted to utter blasphemies, I
had an overpowering impulse to record or draw horrible ideas and
images; lunging deeper and deeper as in a blind spiritual suicide.*
[* Pp. 88-9.]
Two of his intimate friends, finding at this time a notebook full of
these horrible drawings, asked one another, "Is Chesterton going mad?"
He dabbled too in spiritualism until he realised that he had reached
the verge of forbidden and dangerous ground:
I would not altogether rule out the suggestion of some that we were
playing with fire; or even with hell-fire. In the words that were
written for us there was nothing ostensibly degrading, but any amount
that was deceiving. I saw quite enough of the thing to be able to
testify with complete certainty, that something happens which is not
in the ordinary sense natural, or produced by the normal and
conscious human will. Whether it is produced by some subconscious but
still human force, or by some powers, good, bad, or indifferent,
which are external to humanity, I would not myself attempt to decide.
The only thing I will say with complete confidence, about that mystic
and invisible power, is that it tells lies. The lies may be larks or
they may be lures to the imperilled soul or they may be a thousand
other things; but whatever they are, they are not truths about the
other world; or for that matter about this world.*
[*_Autobiography_, p. 77.]
He told Father O'Connor some years later* that "he had used the
planchette freely at one time, but had to give it up on account of
headaches ensuing . . . 'after the headaches came a horrid feeling as
if one were trying to get over a bad spree, with what I can best
describe as a bad smell in the mind.'"
[*_Father Brown on Chesterton,_ p. 74.]
Idling at his work he fell in with other idlers and has left a vivid
description in a _Daily News_ article called, "The Diabolist," of one
of his fellow students.
. . . It was strange, perhaps, that I liked his dirty, drunken
society; it was stranger still, perhaps, that he liked my society.
For hours of the day he would talk with me about Milton or Gothic
architecture; for hours of the night he would go where I have no wish
to follow him, even in speculation. He was a man with a long,
ironical face, and close red hair; he was by class a gentleman, and
could walk like one, but preferred, for some reason, to walk like a
groom carrying two pails. He looked like a sort of super-jockey; as
if some archangel had gone on the Turf. And I shall never forget the
half-hour in which he and I argued about real things for the first
and last time.
. . . He had a horrible fairness of the intellect that made me
despair of his soul. A common, harmless atheist would have denied
that religion produced humility or humility a simple joy; but he
admitted both. He only said, "But shall I not find in evil a life of
its own? Granted that for every woman I ruin one of those red sparks
will go out; will not the expanding pleasure of ruin . . ."
"Do you see that fire?" I asked. "If we had a real fighting
democracy, some one would burn you in it; like the devil-worshipper
that you are."
"Perhaps," he said, in his tired, fair way. "Only what you call
evil I call good."
He went down the great steps alone, and I felt as if I wanted the
steps swept and cleaned. I followed later, and as I went to find my
hat in the low, dark passage where it hung, I suddenly heard his
voice again, but the words were inaudible. I stopped, startled; but
then I heard the voice of one of the vilest of his associates saying,
"Nobody can possibly know." And then I heard those two or three words
which I remember in every syllable and cannot forget. I heard the
Diabolist say, "I tell you I have done everything else. If I do that
I shan't know the difference between right and wrong." I rushed out
without daring to pause; and as I passed the fire I did not know
whether it was hell or the furious love of God.
I have since heard that he died; it may be said, I think, that he
committed suicide; though he did it with tools of pleasure, not with
tools of pain. God help him, I know the road he went; but I have
never known or even dared to think what was that place at which he
stopped and refrained.*
[* Quoted in _G. K. Chesterton: A Criticism_. Alston Rivers Ltd. 1908,
pp. 20-22.]
Revulsion from the atmosphere of evil took Gilbert to no new thing
but to a strengthening of old ties and a mystic renewal of them. The
J.D.C. was idealised into a mystical city of friends:
A LIST
I know a friend, very strong and good. He is the best friend in the
world,
I know another friend, subtle and sensitive. He is certainly the best
friend on earth.
I know another friend: very quiet and shrewd, there is no friend so
good as he.
I know another friend, who is enigmatical and reluctant, he is the
best of all.
I know yet another: who is polished and eager, he is far better
than the rest.
I know another, who is young and very quick, he is the most beloved
of all friends,
I know a lot more and they are all like that.
Amen.
THE COSMIC FACTORIES
What are little boys made of?
Bentley is made of hard wood with a knot in it, a complete set of
Browning and a strong spring;
Oldershaw of a box of Lucifer matches and a stylographic pen;
Lawrence of a barrister's wig: files of Punch and salt,
Maurice of watch-wheels, three riders and a clean collar.
Vernède is made of moonlight and tobacco,
Bertram is mostly a handsome black walking-stick.
Waldo is a nice cabbage, with a vanishing odour of cigarettes,
Salter is made of sand and fire and an university extension ticket.
But the strongest element in all can not be expressed; I think it
is a sort of star.*
[* From _The Notebook_.]
There are fragments of a Morality Play entitled "The Junior Debating
Club," of a modern novel in which everyone of the Debaters makes his
appearance, of a mediaeval story called "The Legend of Sir Edmund of
the Brotherhood of the Jongleurs de Dieu." Notes, fragments, letters,
all show an intense individual interest that covered the life of each
of his friends. If one of them is worried, he worries too; if one
rejoices, he rejoices exceedingly. They write to him about their
ideas and views, their relations with one another, their reactions in
the world of Oxford life, their love affairs. "I am in need of some
literary tonic or blood-letting," says Vernède, "which you alone can
supply."
"I only hope," writes Bertram, "you may be as much use in the world
in future as you have been in the past to your friends."
"Most of the absent Club," writes Salter separated from the others,
"lie together in my pocket at this moment." And Gilbert writes in
_The Notebook:_
AN IDYLL
Tea is made; the red fogs shut round the house but the gas burns.
I wish I had at this moment round the table
A company of fine people.
Two of them are at Oxford and one in Scotland and two at other
places.
But I wish they would all walk in now, for the tea is made.
Gilbert was devoted to them all. But as we have seen, Bentley's was
the supreme friendship of his youth. It was a friendship in foolery
as we are told by the dedication of _Greybeards at Play:_
He was through boyhood's storm and shower
My best my nearest friend,
We wore one hat, smoked one cigar
One standing at each end.
It was a deeply serious friendship as we are told in the dedication
of _The Man Who Was Thursday_. With Bentley alone he shared the
Doubts that drove us through the night as we two talked amain,
And day had broken on the streets ere it broke upon the brain.
Most young men write or at least begin novels of which they are
themselves the heroes. Gilbert wrote and illustrated a fairy story
about a boyish romance of Lucian Oldershaw's while two unfinished
novels have Bentley for hero. He is, too, in the mediaeval story, Sir
Edmund of the Brotherhood of the Jongleurs de Dieu. Gilbert sings,
like all young poets, of first love--but it is Bentley's not his own:
he was as much excited about a girl Bentley had fallen in love with
as if he had fallen in love with her himself. And where a London
street has a special significance one discovers it is because of a
memory of Bentley's. To Bentley then, with whom all was shared,
Gilbert wrote, when through friendship and the goodness of things he
had come out again into the daylight. The second thought that had
saved him had largely grown out of the first. The J.D.C. meant
friendship. Friendship meant the highest of all good things and all
good things called for gratitude. As he gave thanks he drew near to
God.
Dunedin Lodge
Forth Street
North Berwick.
(undated, but probably Long Vac., 1894.)
Your letter was most welcome: in which, however, it does not differ
widely from most of your letters. I read somewhere in some fatuous
Complete Letter-writer or something, that it is correct to imitate
the order of subjects, etc. observed by your correspondent. In
obedience to this rule of breeding I will hurriedly remark that my
holiday has been nice enough in itself; we walk about; lie on the
sand; go and swim in the sea when it generally rains; and the
combination gets in our mouths and we say the name of the Professor
in the "Water Babies." Inwardly speaking, I have had a funny time. A
meaningless fit of depression, taking the form of certain absurd
psychological worries came upon me, and instead of dismissing it and
talking to people, I had it out and went very far into the abysses,
indeed. The result was that I found that things when examined,
necessarily _spelt_ such a mystically satisfactory state of things,
that without getting back to earth, I saw lots that made me certain
it is all right. The vision is fading into common day now, and I am
glad. The frame of mind was the reverse of gloomy, but it would not
do for long. It is embarrassing, talking with God face to face, as a
man speaketh to his friend.
And in another letter:
A cosmos one day being rebuked by a pessimist replied, "How can you
who revile me consent to speak by my machinery? Permit me to reduce
you to nothingness and then we will discuss the matter." Moral. You
should not look a gift universe in the mouth.
Another powerful influence in the direction of mental health was the
discovery of Walt Whitman's poetry. "I shall never forget," Lucian
Oldershaw writes, "reading to him from the Canterbury Walt Whitman in
my bedroom at West Kensington. The séance lasted from two to three
hours, and we were intoxicated with the excitement of the discovery."
For some time now we shall find Gilbert dismissing belief in any
positive existence of evil and treating the universe on the Whitman
principle of jubilant and universal acceptance. He writes, too, in
the Whitman style. By far the most important of his notebooks is one
which, by amazing good fortune, can be dated, beginning in 1894 and
continuing for several years. In its attitude to man it is
Whitmanesque to a high degree, yet it is also most characteristically
Chestertonian. Whitman is content with a shouting, roaring optimism
about life and humanity. Chesterton had to find for it a
philosophical basis. Heartily as he disliked the literary pessimism
of the hour, he was not content simply to exchange one mood for
another. For whether he was conscious of it at the time or not, he
did later see Walt Whitman's outlook as a mood and not a philosophy.
It was a mood, however, that Chesterton himself never really lost,
solely because he did discover the philosophy needed to sustain it.
And thereby, even in this early Notebook, he goes far beyond Whitman.
Even so early he knew that a philosophy of man could not be a
philosophy of man only. He already _feels_ a presence in the universe:
It is evening
And into the room enters again a large indiscernable presence.
Is it a man or a woman?
Is it one long dead or yet to come?
That sits with me in the evening.
This again might have been only a mood--had he not found the
philosophy to sustain it too. It is remarkable how much of this
philosophy he had arrived at in The Notebook, before he had come to
know Catholics. Indeed the Notebook seems to me so important that it
needs a chapter to itself with abundant quotation.
Meanwhile, what was Gilbert doing about his work at University
College? Professor Fred Brown told Lawrence Solomon that when he was
at the Slade School he always seemed to be writing and while
listening to lectures he was always drawing. It is probably true
that, as Cecil Chesterton says, he shrank from the technical toils of
the artist as he never did later from those of authorship; and none
of the professors regarded him as a serious art student. They pointed
later to his illustrations of _Biography for Beginners_ as proof that
he never learnt to draw. Yet how many of the men who did learn
seriously could have drawn those sketches, full of crazy energy and
vitality? I know nothing about drawing, but anyone may know how
brilliant are the illustrations to _Greybeards at Play_ or _Biography
for Beginners_, and later to Mr. Belloc's novels. And anyone can see
the power of line with which he drew in his notebooks unfinished
suggestions of humanity or divinity. Anyone, too, can recognise a
portrait of a man, and faces full of character continue to adorn
G.K.'s exercise books. Of living models he affected chiefly
Gladstone, Balfour, and Joe Chamberlin. In hours of thought he made
drawings of Our Lord with a crown of thorns or nailed to a
cross--these suddenly appear in any of his books between fantastic
drawings or lecture notes. As the mind wandered and lingered the
fingers followed it, and as Gilbert listened to lectures, he would
even draw on the top of his own notes. He had always had facility and
that facility increased, so that in later years he often completed in
a couple of hours the illustrations to a novel of Belloc's. Nor were
these drawings merely illustrations of an already completed text, for
Mr. Belloc has told me that the characters were often half suggested
to him by his friend's drawings.
On one, at any rate, of his vacations, Gilbert went to Italy, and two
letters to Bentley show much of the way his thoughts were going:
Hotel New York
Florence.
(undated, probably 1894.)
DEAR BENTLEY,
I turn to write my second letter to you and my first to Grey
[Maurice Solomon], just after having a very interesting conversation
with an elderly American like Colonel Newcome, though much better
informed, with whom I compared notes on Botticelli, Ruskin, Carlyle,
Emerson and the world in general. I asked him what he thought of
Whitman. He answered frankly that in America they were "hardly up to
him." "We have one town, Boston," he said precisely, "that has got up
to Browning." He then added that there was one thing everyone in
America remembered: Whitman himself. The old gentleman quite kindled
on this topic, "Whitman was a real Man. A man who was so pure and
strong that we could not imagine him doing an unmanly thing anywhere."
It was odd words to hear at a table d'hôte, from your next door
neighbour: it made me quite excited over my salad.
You see that this humanitarianism in which we are entangled asserts
itself where, by all guidebook laws, it should not. When I take up my
pen to write to you, I am thinking more of a white-moustached old
Yankee at an hotel than about the things I have seen within the same
24 hours: the frescoes of Santa Croce, the illuminations of St.
Marco; the white marbles of the tower of Giotto; the very Madonnas of
Raphael, the very David of Michael Angelo. Throughout this tour, in
pursuance of our theory of travelling, we have avoided the guide: he
is the death-knell of individual liberty. Once only we broke through
our rule and that was in favour of an extremely intelligent, nay
impulsive young Italian in Santa Maria Novella, a church where we saw
some of the most interesting pieces of mediaeval painting I have ever
seen, interesting not so much from an artistic as from a moral and
historical point of view. Particularly noticeable was the great
fresco expressive of the grandest mediaeval conception of the
Communion of Saints, a figure of Christ surmounting a crowd of all
ages and stations, among whom were not only Dante, Petrarca, Giotto,
etc., etc., but Plato, Cicero, and best of all, Arius. I said to the
guide, in a tone of expostulation, "Heretico!" (a word of impromptu
manufacture). Whereupon he nodded, smiled and was positively radiant
with the latitudinarianism of the old Italian painter. It was
interesting for it was a fresh proof that even the early Church
united had a period of thought and tolerance before the dark ages
closed around it. There is one thing that I must tell you more of
when we meet, the tower of Giotto. It was built in a square of
Florence, near the Cathedral, by a self-made young painter and
architect who had kept sheep as a boy on the Tuscan hills. It is
still called "The Shepherd's Tower." What I want to tell you about is
the series of bas-reliefs, which Giotto traced on it, representing
the creation and progress of man, his discovery of navigation,
astronomy, law, music and so on. It is religious in the grandest
sense, but there is not a shred of doctrine (even the Fall is
omitted) about this history in stone. If Walt Whitman had been an
architect, he would have built such a tower, with such a story on it.
As I want to go out and have a good look at it before we start for
Venice tomorrow, I must cut this short. I hope you are enjoying
yourself as much as I am, and thinking about me half as much as I am
about you.
Your very sincere friend,
GILBERT K. CHESTERTON.
No one would have enjoyed more than Gilbert rereading this letter in
after years and noting the suggestion that the fifteenth century
belonged to the early church and preceded the Dark Ages. And I think,
too, that even in Giotto's Tower, he might later have discovered some
roots of doctrine.
Grand Hotel De Milan
(undated)
DEAR BENTLEY,
I write you a third letter before coming back, while Venice and
Verona are fresh in my mind. Of the former I can really only
discourse viva voce. Imagine a city, whose very slums are full of
palaces, whose every other house wall has a battered fresco, or a
gothic bas-relief; imagine a sky fretted with every kind of pinnacle
from the great dome of the Salute to the gothic spires of the Ducal
Palace and the downright arabesque orientalism of the minarets of St.
Mark's; and then imagine the whole flooded with a sea that seems only
intended to reflect sunsets, and you still have no idea of the place
I stopped in for more than 48 hours. Thence we went to Verona, where
Romeo and Juliet languished and Dante wrote most of "Hell." The
principal products (1) tombs: particularly those of the Scala, a very
good old family with an excellent taste in fratricide. Their three
tombs (one to each man I mean: one man, one grave) are really
glorious examples of three stages of Gothic: of which more when we
meet. (2) Balconies: with young ladies hanging over them; really
quite a preponderating feature. Whether this was done in obedience to
local associations and in expectation of a Romeo, I can't say. I can
only remark that if such was the object, the supply of Juliets seemed
very much in excess of the demand. (3) Roman remains: on which,
however, I did not pronounce a soliloquy beginning, "Wonderful
people . . ." which is the correct thing to do. Just as I get to this
I receive your letter and resolve to begin another sheet of paper. I
did read Rosebery's speech and was more than interested; I was
stirred. The old order (of parliamentary forms, peerages, Whiggism
and right honourable friends) has changed, yielding place to the new
(of industrialism, county council sanitation, education and the
Kingdom of Heaven at hand) and, whatever the Archbishop of
Canterbury may say, God fulfils himself in many ways, even by local
government. . . .
Several things in your letter require notice. First the accusation
levelled against me of being prejudiced against Professor Huxley, I
repel with indignation and scorn. You are not prejudiced against
cheese because you like oranges; and though the Professor is not
Isaiah or St. Francis or Whitman or Richard le Gallienne (to name
some of those whom I happen to affect) I should be the last person in
the world to say a word against an earnest, able, kind-hearted and
most refreshingly rational man: by far the best man of his type I
know. As to what you say on education generally, I am entirely with
you, but it will take a good interview to say how much. As for the
little Solomons, I am prepared to [be] fond of all of them, as I am
of all children, even the grubby little mendicants that run these
Italian streets. I am glad you and Grey have pottered. Potter again.
I have had such a nice letter from Lawrence. It makes me think it is
all going "to be the fair beginning of a time."
Had the months of art study only developed in Gilbert Chesterton his
power of drawing, they might still have been worthwhile. But they
gave him, too, a time to dream and to think which working for a
University degree would never have allowed. His views and his mind
were developing fast, and he was also developing a power to which we
owe some of his best work--depth of vision.
Most art criticism is the work of those who never could have been
artists--which is possibly why it tends to be so critical. Gilbert,
who could perhaps have been an artist, preferred to appreciate what
the artist was trying to say and to put into words what he read on
the canvas. Hence both in his _Watts_ and his _Blake_ we get what
some of us ask of an art critic--the enlargement of our own powers of
vision. This is what made Ruskin so great an art critic, a fact once
realised, today forgotten. He may have made a thousand mistakes, he
had a multitude of foolish prejudices, but he opened the eyes of a
whole generation to see and understand great art.
G.K. was to begin his published writings with poetry and art
criticism--in other words with vision. And this vision he partly owed
to the Slade School. Here is a letter (undated) to Bentley containing
a hint of what eight years later became a book on Watts:
On Saturday I saw two exhibitions of pictures. The first was the
Royal Academy, where I went with Salter. There was one picture there,
though the walls were decorated with frames very prettily. As to the
one picture, if you look at an Academy catalogue you will see
"Jonah": by G. F. Watts, and you will imagine a big silly picture of
a whale. But if you go to Burlington House you will see something
terrible. A spare, wild figure, clad in a strange sort of green with
his head flung so far back that his upper part is a miracle of
foreshortening, his hands thrust out, his face ghastly with ecstasy,
his dry lips yelling aloud, a figure of everlasting protest and
defiance. And as a background (perfect in harmony of colour) you have
the tracery of the Assyrian bas-reliefs, such as survive in wrecks in
the British Museum, a row of those processions of numberless captives
bowing before smiling Kings: a cruel sort of art. And the passionate
energy of that lonely screaming figure in front, makes you think of a
great many things besides Assyrians: among others of some words of
Renan: I quote from memory: "But the trace of Israel will be eternal.
She it was who alone among the tyrannies of antiquity, raised her
voice for the helpless, the oppressed, the forgotten."
But this only expresses a fraction of it. The only thing to do is
to come and look at this excited gentleman with bronze skin and hair
that approaches green, his eyes simply white with madness. And Jonah
said, "Yea, I do well to be angry: even unto death."
He had learnt to look at colour, to look at line, to describe
pictures. But far more important than this, he could now create in
the imagination gardens and sunsets and sheer colour, so as to give
to his novels and stories pictorial value, to his fantasies glow, and
to his poetry vision of the realities of things. In his very first
volume of Essays, _The Defendant_, were to be passages that could be
written only by one who had learnt to draw. For instance, in "A
Defence of Skeletons":
The actual sight of the little wood, with its grey and silver sea
of life is entirely a winter vision. So dim and delicate is the heart
of the winter woods, a kind of glittering gloaming, that a figure
stepping towards us in the chequered twilight seems as if he were
breaking through unfathomable depths of spiders' webs.
In the year 1895, in which G.K. left art for publishing, he came of
age "with a loud report." He writes to Bentley:
Being twenty-one years old is really rather good fun. It is one of
those occasions when you remember the existence of all sorts of
miscellaneous people. A cousin of mine, Alice Chesterton, daughter of
my Uncle Arthur, writes me a delightfully cordial letter from Berlin,
where she is a governess; and better still, my mother has received a
most amusing letter from an old nurse of mine, an exceptionally nice
and intelligent nurse, who writes on hearing that it is my
twenty-first birthday. Billy (an epithet is suppressed) gave me a
little notebook and a little photograph frame. The first thing I did
with the notebook was to make a note of his birthday. The first thing
I shall do with the frame will be to get Grey to give me a photograph
of him to put into it. Yes, it is not bad, being twenty-one, in a
world so full of kind people. . . .
I have just been out and got soaking and dripping wet; one of my
favourite dissipations. I never enjoy weather so much as when it is
driving, drenching, rattling, washing rain. As Mr. Meredith says in
the book you gave me, "Rain, O the glad refresher of the grain, and
welcome waterspouts of blessed rain." (It is in a poem called "Earth
and a Wedded Woman," which is fat.) Seldom have I enjoyed a walk so
much. My sister water was all there and most affectionate. Everything
I passed was lovely, a little boy pickabacking another little boy
home, two little girls taking shelter with a gigantic umbrella, the
gutters boiling like rivers and the hedges glittering with rain. And
when I came to our corner the shower was over, and there was a great
watery sunset right over No. 80, what Mr. Ruskin calls an "opening
into Eternity." Eternity is pink and gold. This may seem a very
strange rant, but it is one of my "specimen days." I suppose you
would really prefer me to write as I feel, and I am so constituted
that these Daily incidents get me that way. Yes, I like rain. It
means something, I am not sure what; something freshening, cleaning,
washing out, taking in hand, not caring-a-damn-what-you-think,
doing-its-duty, robust, noisy, moral, wet. It is the Baptism of the
Church of the Future.
Yesterday afternoon (Sunday) Lawrence and Maurice came here. We were
merely infants at play, had skipping races round the garden and
otherwise raced. ("Runner, run thy race," said Confucius, "and in the
running find strength and reward.") After that we tried talking about
Magnus, and came to some hopeful conclusions. Magnus is all right. As
for Lawrence and Grey, if there is anything righter than all right,
they are that. . . .
There is an expression in Meredith's book which struck me immensely:
"the largeness of the evening earth." The sensation that the Cosmos
has all its windows open is very characteristic of evening, just as
it is at this moment. I feel very good. Everything out of the window
looks very, very flat and yellow: I do not know how else to describe
it.
It is like the benediction at the end of the service.