FOREARMED
We do not detract from the moral services of Romain Rolland, but we may
perhaps excuse to some extent his opponents, when we insist that Rolland
had excelled all contemporary imaginative writers in the profundity of
his preparatory studies of war and its problems. If to-day, in
retrospect, we contemplate his writings, we marvel to note how, from the
very first and throughout a long period of years, they combined to build
up, as it were, a colossal pyramid, culminating in the point upon which
the lightnings of war were to be discharged. For twenty years, the
author's thought, his whole creative activity, had been unintermittently
concentrated upon the contradictions between spirit and force, between
freedom and the fatherland, between victory and defeat. Through a
hundred variations he had pursued the same fundamental theme, treating
it dramatically, epically, and in manifold other ways. There is hardly a
problem relevant to this question which is not touched upon by
Christophe and Olivier, by Aërt and by the Girondists, in their
discussions. Intellectually regarded, Rolland's writings are a
maneuvering ground for all the incentives to war. He thus had his
conclusions already drawn when others were beginning an attempt to come
to terms with events. As historian, he had described the perpetual
recurrence of war's typical accompaniments, had discussed the psychology
of mass suggestion, and had shown the effects of wartime mentality upon
the individual. As moralist and as citizen of the world, he had long ere
this formulated his creed. We may say, in fact, that Rolland's mind had
been in a sense immunized against the illusions of the crowd and against
infection by prevalent falsehoods.
Not by chance does an artist decide which problems he will consider. The
dramatist does not make a "lucky selection" of his theme. The musician
does not "discover" a beautiful melody, but already has it within him.
It is not the artist who creates the problems, but the problems which
create the artist; just as it is not the prophet who makes his prophecy,
but the foresight which creates the prophet. The artist's choice is
always pre-ordained. The man who has foreseen the essential problem of a
whole civilization, of a disastrous epoch, must of necessity, in the
decisive hour, play a leading part. He only who had contemplated the
coming European war as an abyss towards which the mad hunt of recent
decades, making light of every warning, had been speeding, only such a
one could command his soul, could refrain from joining the bacchanalian
rout, could listen unmoved to the throbbing of the war drums. Who but
such a man could stand upright in the greatest storm of illusion the
world has ever known?
Thus it came to pass that not merely during the first hour of the war
was Rolland in opposition to other writers and artists of the day. This
opposition dated from the very inception of his career, and hence for
twenty years he had been a solitary. The reason why the contrast between
his outlook and that of his generation had not hitherto been
conspicuous, the reason why the cleavage was not disclosed until the
actual outbreak of war, lies in this, that Rolland's divergence was a
matter not so much of mood as of character. Before the apocalyptic year,
almost all persons of artistic temperament had recognized quite as
definitely as Rolland had recognized that a fratricidal struggle between
Europeans would be a crime, would disgrace civilization. With few
exceptions, they were pacifists. It would be more correct to say that
with few exceptions they believed themselves to be pacifists. For
pacifism does not simply mean, to be a friend to peace, but to be a
worker in the cause of peace, an [Greek: eirênopoiós], as the New Testament has
it. Pacifism signifies the activity of an effective will to peace, not
merely the love of an easy life and a preference for repose. It
signifies struggle; and like every struggle it demands, in the hour of
danger, self-sacrifice and heroism. Now these "pacifists" we have just
been considering had merely a sentimental fondness for peace; they were
friendly towards peace, just as they were friendly towards ideas of
social equality, towards philanthropy, towards the abolition of capital
punishment. Such faith as they possessed was a faith devoid of passion.
They wore their opinions as they wore their clothing, and when the time
of trial came they were ready to exchange their pacifist ethic for the
ethic of the war-makers, were ready to don a national uniform in matters
of opinion. At bottom, they knew the right just as well as Rolland, but
they had not the courage of their opinions. Goethe's saying to Eckermann
applies to them with deadly force. "All the evils of modern literature
are due to lack of character in individual investigators and writers."
Thus Rolland did not stand alone in his knowledge, which was shared by
many intellectuals and statesmen. But in his case, all his knowledge was
tinged with religious fervor; his beliefs were a living faith; his
thoughts were actions. He was unique among imaginative writers for the
splendid vigor with which he remained true to his ideals when all others
were deserting the standard; for the way in which he defended the
European spirit against the raging armies of the sometime European
intellectuals now turned patriots. Fighting as he had fought from youth
upwards on behalf of the invisible against the world of reality, he
displayed, as a foil to the heroism of the trenches, a higher heroism
still. While the soldiers were manifesting the heroism of blood, Rolland
manifested the heroism of the spirit, and showed the glorious spectacle
of one who was able, amid the intoxication of the war-maddened masses,
to maintain the sobriety and freedom of an unclouded mind.