IX. THE NEED FOR NARROWNESS

Through all this chaos, then we come back once more to our main

conclusion. The true task of culture to-day is not a task of expansion,

but very decidedly of selection--and rejection. The educationist must

find a creed and teach it. Even if it be not a theological creed, it

must still be as fastidious and as firm as theology. In short, it must

be orthodox. The teacher may think it antiquated to have to decide

precisely between the faith of Calvin and of Laud, the faith of Aquinas

and of Swedenborg; but he still has to choose between the faith of

Kipling and of Shaw, between the world of Blatchford and of General

Booth. Call it, if you will, a narrow question whether your child shall

be brought up by the vicar or the minister or the popish priest. You

have still to face that larger, more liberal, more highly civilized

question, of whether he shall be brought up by Harmsworth or by

Pearson, by Mr. Eustace Miles with his Simple Life or Mr. Peter Keary

with his Strenuous Life; whether he shall most eagerly read Miss Annie

S. Swan or Mr. Bart Kennedy; in short, whether he shall end up in the

mere violence of the S. D. F., or in the mere vulgarity of the Primrose

League. They say that nowadays the creeds are crumbling; I doubt it, but

at least the sects are increasing; and education must now be sectarian

education, merely for practical purposes. Out of all this throng of

theories it must somehow select a theory; out of all these thundering

voices it must manage to hear a voice; out of all this awful and aching

battle of blinding lights, without one shadow to give shape to them, it

must manage somehow to trace and to track a star.

I have spoken so far of popular education, which began too vague and

vast and which therefore has accomplished little. But as it happens

there is in England something to compare it with. There is an

institution, or class of institutions, which began with the same popular

object, which has since followed a much narrower object, but which had

the great advantage that it did follow some object, unlike our modern

elementary schools.

In all these problems I should urge the solution which is positive,

or, as silly people say, “optimistic.” I should set my face, that is,

against most of the solutions that are solely negative and abolitionist.

Most educators of the poor seem to think that they have to teach the

poor man not to drink. I should be quite content if they teach him to

drink; for it is mere ignorance about how to drink and when to drink

that is accountable for most of his tragedies. I do not propose (like

some of my revolutionary friends) that we should abolish the public

schools. I propose the much more lurid and desperate experiment that we

should make them public. I do not wish to make Parliament stop working,

but rather to make it work; not to shut up churches, but rather to

open them; not to put out the lamp of learning or destroy the hedge of

property, but only to make some rude effort to make universities fairly

universal and property decently proper.

In many cases, let it be remembered, such action is not merely going

back to the old ideal, but is even going back to the old reality. It

would be a great step forward for the gin shop to go back to the inn. It

is incontrovertibly true that to mediaevalize the public schools would

be to democratize the public schools. Parliament did once really mean

(as its name seems to imply) a place where people were allowed to talk.

It is only lately that the general increase of efficiency, that is, of

the Speaker, has made it mostly a place where people are prevented from

talking. The poor do not go to the modern church, but they went to the

ancient church all right; and if the common man in the past had a grave

respect for property, it may conceivably have been because he sometimes

had some of his own. I therefore can claim that I have no vulgar itch of

innovation in anything I say about any of these institutions. Certainly

I have none in that particular one which I am now obliged to pick out

of the list; a type of institution to which I have genuine and personal

reasons for being friendly and grateful: I mean the great Tudor

foundations, the public schools of England. They have been praised for a

great many things, mostly, I am sorry to say, praised by themselves and

their children. And yet for some reason no one has ever praised them the

one really convincing reason.

*****

What's Wrong with the World · 第 51 / 67 题