IV

But it is not only nor indeed even chiefly through meeting new types of

people that we can arrive at that angle of detachment. We need an entire

change of setting. It would be hard to overrate the subconscious

influence on us of our surroundings. A sudden sensation of taste and

smell will recall to us a cycle of associated memoirs. The glimpse

through a railway-carriage window of a gabled roof, a square church

tower, a particular shade of sunlight on red brick will open the pages

of a chapter whose existence we had almost forgotten; will reveal in

relief, in perspective--with an objective reality that at the time it

did not hold for us--a facet of the past. The obvious, the superficial

reflection on such occurrences would be an expression of surprise that

so trivial an affair as the taste of cocoa, the smell of wet stone, the

glimpse of a square-towered church, should become a window opening on

childhood. But probably nearer to the truth would be the assumption that

these moments of sight and taste of which, at the time, we hardly more

than recognised the existence, and to which we attached no value, were

an essential part of the framework of our thoughts, and our hopes, and

our actions, and that it was from them that what we have come to regard

in our lives as personal and important drew its nourishment, its colour,

and its direction.

As the novels of Alphonse Daudet are steeped in the sunshine of the

south and the simple, lazy kindliness that it engenders, so are

Maupassant’s stories children of the mud, the lights, the rain, the

gallantries of Paris. And so over the poetry and novels of Thomas Hardy

lies the deep shadow of the Wessex countryside. And among these many

influences that tend, unknown to us, to make our lives gay or sombre,

deep or shallow, or it would be more true perhaps to say that tend to

accentuate in us those characteristics that are gay or sombre, deep or

shallow, there are few that touch us more surely or more closely than

that of the nature of the buildings, the streets, the shops, the

churches among which we live.

It would be worth while, indeed, discussing whether the classical

scholar of some old foundation derives the sense of antiquity, that

knowledge that we are parts of a pattern, the threads of which pass out

on either side of us, which forms so human, so tolerant a basis for his

ideas and his actions, more from the study of Homer and Catullus than

from the tranquillising presence on every side of him of old buildings,

gothic arches and cloisters, and curious quadrangles. British

administration, whatever may have been said against it, has been

credited always with a genial tolerance, an admirable refusal to be

perturbed by trifles, a policy of “let it pass.” A capital social

lubricant, this characteristic. And I wonder whether it would be too

fanciful to attribute a part, at any rate, of this placidity in the

class from which the majority of officers and civil servants are drawn,

to the mellowing influence of the school buildings among which are spent

their most impressionable years. Some such effect there must be, I am

very sure. A mind continually encountering the survivals of early

generations acquires a detachment from the immediate present. A boy who,

on his way from one classroom to another, from the dayroom to the

cricket field, and the library to the chapel, has always before him the

silent grey-brown witnesses of continuity and tradition, cannot help

thinking often consciously, and unconsciously times without number: “all

this was going on two hundred years ago and, without any very

considerable alteration, it will be going on two hundred hence.”

That sensation we rarely if ever get in London. I doubt if there is in

the road I live in a single brick that is fifty-five years old. Twenty

years ago Golders Green did not exist. I can barely picture this North

End road as it was in the spring of 1907 when my father decided to build

a house here, and to call it Underhill. A muddy, unpaved affair it was,

with fields on either side of it as far as I remember: and it would

remain so, we were told, for the Hampstead tube was in process of

construction, and it would be impossible to build houses on the narrow

gap between it and the road. Land’s End for a while it seemed to us

after our nine years in a dingy West Hampstead thoroughfare. There were

no shops then at the Cross Roads. We had to walk across the heath to

Hampstead. Indeed, only one train in every four or six came through to

Golders Green. Hampstead, Highgate, Golders Green; that was the

electric sign then on the Euston platform. There were no non-stops. And

one had to decide whether it would be quicker and pleasanter to walk

across the heath or to wait for a Golders Green train.

And then the Garden Suburb came, and the builders discovered that there

was ample room for a row of houses between the railway and the road, and

Smith and Boots and Sainsbury added each of them another branch to their

activities. And ’buses ceased to stop at Child’s Hill and tubes at

Hampstead. And within four years the cross roads became as good a spot

as Piccadilly for the unwary to be run over.

When I came home at the end of the first term at my prep. I could hardly

recognise the North End Road. I believe that had I been transported

there by a motor in the night I should not have known where I was, any

more than I should have known where I was had I found myself in the

spring of 1920 suddenly beside Potije Chateau on the road from Ypres to

Zonnebeke. Golders Green sprang into life as speedily and as haphazardly

as have the devastated areas. That immense hippodrome that confronts you

as you turn to the left out of the station; they had not begun work on

it when I went back to Sherborne in the autumn of 1913; but the curtain

rang up on Boxing-Day. In less than three months they built it; working

from start to finish against the clock. They had no time to instal a

heating apparatus. On that first evening we shivered in greatcoats; but

within a week the fires were banked up. The heat dripped on to us from

the ceiling. An achievement, undoubtedly. Golders Green is a

comfortable and commodious spot. There is the heath for exercise; the

hippodrome for amusement; there are barbers and baths and cinemas, and

trams and tubes and ’buses, and a taxi rank; an illuminated clock at the

cross roads; two restaurants. A place, I am told, where one may dance,

that even.

An impressive outpost, doubtless of Newer London: a fine tribute to

progress, and mechanical invention. But there is one thing that, search

how you may, you will never find at Golders Green. You will not find

anywhere any indication that the world was inhabited a hundred years

ago.

Nor will you find any such indication at Tottenham, or Balham, or at

Upper Clapton; new streets; new shops; new houses; travel by what road

you choose through any of the London suburbs: you will find everywhere

the same cross-roads, with their policemen, and their electric cars; and

the white sham stone-fronted cinema; and the local empire, and the long

stretch of detached and semi-detached villas, with their garages and

garden plots, very pleasant, very clean, very comfortable: cheap

amusement and good amusement; such as grandparents knew not. But that

sense of antiquity; those reminders in the gables at street corners of

other men and other fortunes, that is lost to us. The old streets and

the old buildings are being swept away. History in London can only be

found in the places where one cannot afford to live, and the places

where one would not want to live. We have no eternal landscape to speak

to us of the passage of human life. We have no equivalent for the

Sussex Downs; the Downs that have hardly altered since the Romans camped

on them. We have neither the modesty nor the pride of heritage. Family

feeling dies where there are no family seat and no family possessions.

We are parvenus, we townsfolk. It is only through a detaching of

ourselves from our surroundings, through travel, or the company of

books, most particularly, perhaps, through moments of intense

self-realisation when we are in touch with eternal instincts or eternal

forces, that we recover our sense of values, that we see ourselves

simply as part of a pattern, a footfall in the sound of passage.

And it may have been that it was in search of some such amulet that

Clifford Bax and I set out last April across the North Sea to Norway.

A long journey it was, with a good twenty-four hours of open sea,

twenty-four hours in which to wonder what crazed splendour, what folly

of irresponsible ambition, urged our Viking forefathers to desert their

sheltered fjords in those flat-bottomed, high-prowed craft of theirs. A

long unheroic journey on my part, at any rate. I lay supine and neither

stirred nor ate, consoling myself as best I might with Geoffrey Moss’s

entertaining if scandalous _Sweet Pepper_.

It was worth it, though, that harassing, exacting journey, for the sake

of the two hours of quiet passage in the late evening through the

fjords. There is no country that welcomes its guests less ostentatiously

than Norway does, that stands more simply on its own attainments. There

is no parade of harbours and high buildings and imposing statues. Just

the long stretches of receding waterways, motionless, many coloured

waterways, green and grey and purple; a purple that shimmers now and

then to the rich transparent red of Homer’s sea, Homer’s wine-coloured

midland sea; the fading waterways, and about them the long, endless,

low-crested circling hills. Hardly a sign of life, only now and then

below the promontories of rock, a warning light, and near it on the land

some small wooden house.

But then Norway is an empty country. It is as large as England, and it

has a population of three million. You will see no towns on the long

fourteen-hour journey from Bergen to Christiania. Only here and there a

collection of scattered hutments and the long stretches of the fjords.

And it is remarkable that so small a nation should have made such a

considerable contribution to the literature of Europe. A useless,

hopeless task it must sometimes seem, we felt, to the young Norwegian.

“I am writing,” one can imagine him to say, “in a language that only

three million people are able to understand. It is possible that my work

may be some day read and appreciated in the foreign cities of Europe;

but it will be read there in translation; and the phrasing, the colour,

the rhythm, on which I have expended so much labour, will have gone out

of it. If only I had been born in America!”

And then we remembered that the population of England when Shakespeare

wrote was little greater than that of Norway is to-day; that it seemed

worth while to him to write for three million people; that these, as

all other, things are relative; that it would be impossible without

detachment, without a sense of the eternal values, to produce a

masterpiece; and that such a one as Björnson would know out of the

direct simplicity of his nature, that it is enough to plough one’s

furrow to the end.

We were bound for Finse and its winter sports, and it was exciting to

look for the first signs of ice and snow at the edge of the water, to

watch at each halt on the way the fall of the thermometer. We seemed to

get little colder, though, for that is the charm of Norway. The sun

shines out of a blue sky, and your face tingles with the glare that the

snow flings up on it. It is a pity, though, that you have to wear

darkened glasses to protect your eyes. It robs the sky of its colour,

and if such a phrase may be permitted, it seems to bleach the snow, with

the effect of an unreal twilight. Only now and again in glimpses,

through windows for the most part, can one see the landscape as it

really is.

But then it is not for the sake of its scenery that one goes to Finse;

the long sheets of snow have, it is true, a certain remote, cold

loveliness of their own; but the continued sight of snow is apt by

itself to be depressing. Finse is not, shall we say, an ideal place for

the ancient and infirm; it would be unexhilarating for them to sit all

day long, looking out of the drawing-room window. Finse is very nearly

the highest place on the Bergen-Christiania railway. It is well above

the vegetation line. It consists of a station, an hotel, and some

half-dozen hutments. It is quite simply an encampment among the hills,

and from the windows of the hotel one sees nothing but snow and

mountains.

But one does not go to Finse to sit in drawing-rooms, not, that is to

say, till nightfall, when one collapses among cushions, exhausted after

a day on skies. Finse is the greatest place in the world for ski-ing; in

its season, that is to say, in March and April and the first weeks of

May. During the Swiss season it is a place of fog and mist and some

three hours’ precarious sunlight, but the snow is fine and hard there,

when Mürren has become a bog.

We went there as novices, Clifford Bax and I. And it is a good place,

Finse, for the novice. It is built beside a lake, frozen over for the

great part of the year; and the banks that slope gently down to it

provide a scale of ascending difficulty. For the first morning one

stumbles helplessly within a hundred yards of the hotel on a slope with

a gradient of something, I suppose, like one in fifty. By the afternoon

one has come to master it. And as one returns tired to one’s tea, one

looks southwards beyond the lake and one says, “I think we’ll try that

slope to-morrow.”

One cannot, or at least we could not, cease in six days to be a novice.

But we managed to amuse ourselves thoroughly climbing up slopes and

falling down them. Perhaps, had we been more proficient, we should have

enjoyed it less. A thing ceases to be exciting when you are certain of

success, and you avoid the slope that you have been down ten times in

succession without disaster. How thrilling a bicycle was in those early

days. How proud we were to free-wheel down a hill, how we looked

forward to the day when we should be able to mount and unmount without

damage to our trousers. How we envied the blasé tradesboy who just

seemed to pick up the handlebars and jump on the machine. And now that

we can bicycle, the last thing that we would do would be to ride on one

for pleasure.

But then that is hardly a fair parallel. Cycling is a form of athletics

limited in scope by cross-roads and motor regulations and police. You

cannot enlarge your craft. But ski-ing must be like cricket, and must be

always new. As soon as you can do a thing one way, you learn to do it in

another. We spend hours in the nets at school learning to drive a

straight half volley over the bowler’s head or past midoff along the

grass. And then as soon as we have got it, we start trying to turn it to

mid-wicket, so that I do not suppose we could drive the thing straight

now even if we wanted, any more than Nevinson, an accurate draughtsman

and a prizewinner at the Slade, could draw a horse that would resemble a

photograph of one.

And at Finse there must be always new worlds to conquer. And always

there must be that splendid compensating sense of exhilaration that

comes from a complete physical fitness. It would be hard to imagine a

more healthy life. There is no bar there; and no late hours. You are in

bed an hour before midnight. And you wake wonderfully fit to the most

colossal breakfast that I have ever seen.

In the middle of the dining-room there is a large table on which is

spread an incredibly diverse collection of dishes. We counted them one

morning: there were forty-eight; all manner of cold meats, all manner of

cheese, all manner of _hors d’œuvres_. And there are shrimps, and

prawns, and lobsters, and fish puddings; there are egg omelettes and ham

omelettes, curious cold game, and fruit and jams and marmalade.

Breakfast was a very great adventure. You were, in addition, served with

a boiled egg and a beaker of cold milk. We never quite knew whether it

was intended to be drunk as a cocktail or a liqueur or a table wine. We

tried it in all three ways; and it was in each equally delightful. The

Norwegian breakfast is the finest type of meal that I have, I think,

ever eaten; and I was delighted to find certain personal peculiarities

endorsed by Norwegian taste. I always, when I lunch at home, eat

marmalade and cheese, preferably gruyère cheese, together. It is a

protective taste developed gradually since the days when I was made to

eat at my preparatory school milk-pudding every day for four years. It

was doubtless a very admirable form of discipline. But I have not since

eaten any pudding of any kind, and have instead developed what is, my

brother tells me, a disgusting habit, but one which the Norwegian would

apparently approve. At any rate, they place side by side on their middle

table mountains of gruyère cheese and basins of marmalade. _Coldt bord_

they called it, that centre table, and we thought of inscribing a ballad

to it, in whose every line should be the name of some new dish.

A noble foundation, that breakfast, for a long day in the open; and when

evening came one was glad to sit and talk quietly; one’s brain fresh

and one’s body tired. It is no part of my intention here--and I half

hope that it never will be--to draw pictures of my friends. Enough to

say that the evenings passed very happily in such casual intermittent

talk as can only be exchanged between two friends who know each other so

well as to have left scarcely a secret from one another.

It is an eight-hour journey from Finse to Christiania. But eight-hour

journeys abroad seem of no more matter than a week-end run to Brighton.

We are frightened in London of any place that we cannot find on a tube

map. I have never once been to watch a county match at Leyton.

“Heavens,” I say, “but that’s miles away. I could not think of going

there.” It never even occurred to me three years ago to watch the third

day of the Middlesex and Yorkshire match at Bradford, although the

championship was at stake there. And yet it would not have been, I

expect, such a terribly fatiguing affair. I could have probably caught a

train at about ten o’clock. I should have read a couple of novels for

review, lunched on the way, and arrived at the ground shortly after two.

I should have seen the finish of the match. By six o’clock I should have

been in the train, reviewing one novel before dinner, the other after;

and arriving at home certainly before midnight.

I remember being considerably surprised last summer when an officer on

leave from India told me that he was going to spend a week in Blackpool

to see the D’Oyly Carte Company in the Gilbert and Sullivan Operas.

“Lord,” I said, “what, all the way up there?” “It doesn’t seem very

far,” he answered, “when you’ve come all the way from Poona.” Certainly

we did not feel that we were undertaking a great enterprise when we left

behind us the mountains and the snow of Finse.

It is a good city, Christiania, clean and fresh and compact, with broad

streets, and an honest sprinkling of restaurants and cafés: a good city,

shall we say, to spend four days in.

After four days one begins to weary of shop windows, and museums, and

public buildings, and a drifting in and out of cafés. But for four days

it was very pleasant to watch the stir of life in a foreign capital.

Very different from ours, it would seem, the framework of their routine:

their mealtimes, for example. You will find a notice outside the

principal restaurants: Breakfast, 11-2; dinner, 2-6; supper, 8-11.

Between the hours of six and eight, that is to say, you cannot get a

solid meal, and the big meal of the day is taken at about half-past

three. The restaurants were quite empty at two o’clock when we used to

begin our lunch.

As far as we could gather Norway knows not our heavy half-past one

lunch, over which so much profitable business is transacted. When the

Norwegian sits down before a table with a menu and a wine list in front

of him, his day’s work is finished. If he feels any need for casual

sustenance he goes into a café and has a snack.

Christiania has made a speciality of the snack. I suppose that any

stranger abroad must wonder who do the work and when they do it. There

are never anywhere any signs of industry. The Italian who is taken to

the Oval on a weekday would certainly wonder how ten thousand workmen

could afford to watch cricket on a Monday. Indeed, I have yet to

discover how they can. If they are in work they should be in factories

and offices, and if out of work one would assume them to be penniless.

There is no Oval in Christiania, but there are, as I said, an honest

number of cafés; and the _coldt bord_ is spread in ample welcome. Not

quite as amply perhaps as in Finse. But still amply enough to make an

Englishman a little ashamed of the hospitality that the Bodega offers to

its guests. Great trays of various _hors d’œuvres_, cold meats and cold

poached eggs, and cheese sandwiches: sandwiches that are a vast

improvement on our own; with the cheese or meat arranged on one and not

between two slices of bread, so that you can see what you are buying and

cannot be deceived into the purchase of a ham sandwich entirely composed

of fat.

Perhaps I am talking too much of the pleasures of the table, but food

has a large share in the right ordering of a holiday. A sense of moral

indignation is not a characteristic with which we should be inclined to

associate the engaging and fantastic personality of Mr Norman Douglas.

But he has known such moments; and those of us who consider good food

and good wine two of God’s greatest gifts to man, remember gratefully

his attitude to the traveller who confessed that he did not mind what he

ate; and in truth it was a disarming of revelation. “The man who is

indifferent to women,” George Moore makes one of his characters say, “is

indifferent to all things,” and so is the man who is indifferent to

food and wine. Such a one is incomplete. He lacks a sense. He is an

abnormality. And myself I should be equally pained were someone to say

to me, “Oh, let’s go anywhere, I don’t mind where I dine.” I should feel

as pained, and for that matter as shocked, as if someone who had asked

me to lend him a book were to say, “Oh, any old novel, I don’t care!”

Far preferable the lady who said to the assistant at Bumpus’s, “I’ve got

a green book and a red book, now I should like a blue book.” She had at

least a sense of setting, of _décor_. Her drawing-room would have been,

I am sure, a very delicate symphony in blue and grey, and the light from

the electric lamp would have fallen softly on an exquisite disarray of

cushions. Certainly she would never have said, “Oh, let’s go anywhere. I

don’t mind where I dine.” She would know that evening is the artist of

the day’s traffic, who smooths, and composes and selects, and achieves a

harmony out of disorder; that it is for us to co-operate by the choice

of the right book, the right companion, and the right setting.

That is why the choice of the right restaurant is so important. If we

are in the mood for conversation there is our club or the Café Royal; if

we are alone and it would amuse us to watch other people dance, or

should we wish to add as a flavouring to the music and the dancing the

note ever so slightly struck of fugitive romances, there is the balcony

of the Elysée Café. Perhaps we feel sentimental, and at a certain table

in a certain restaurant, to the accompaniment of “Tango Dream” or of

some other tune of yesteryear that we have specially asked the

orchestra to play, we recall a phase of life that is concluded, and

quote with appropriate melancholy, Ah me, ah me, with what another heart

...! And there are again times when we ask simply for a quiet meal in

our own company.

It may have been good fortune, or it may have been through trained

instinct, that we discovered on our first day in Christiania the Theatre

Café: the restaurant was on the first floor, and there was a band on the

balcony above the café on the floor below; so that the music rose softly

and mysteriously through the floor, making it easy for us to weave

stories round the various couples of the other tables.

That middle-aged man and the young girl at the table by the window, were

they father and daughter; or were we attending the first scene, the

prelude, of some grey seduction? That young couple two tables from us,

they were not noticing what they ate. They hardly spoke a word to one

another; but their eyes kept meeting: and as they met, they smiled. She

was not wearing an engagement ring and we wondered whether he would

propose to her that afternoon, or whether he had already proposed to her

as they had driven there that morning in a taxi. Were they sitting now

shy and happy in the memory of their first kisses? We wondered if they

would make a success of life together. They were very young, we thought.

Would she still be pretty in ten years’ time? Would that fragile charm

of hers survive in womanhood? And we decided that it depended largely on

the life that awaited her, that hers was not a prettiness to sustain

long hours of toil and housework; and we hoped in that atmosphere of

unseen music that fortune would be kind to her, that her man would

invest their money wisely and present her with a large house and many

servants.

We went a couple of times, on the invitation of the management, to the

National Theatre, once to a modern piece--a Galsworthy sort of play--the

other time to a costume drama--_Madame Legros_, by Heinrich Mann. We

were not, either of us, I think, able to follow the plots at all

closely; but as a compensation we were able to study more carefully

those little mannerisms of dress and acting that are obscured by the

quick action of the play; that the Norwegian dandy, for example, does

not hitch up his trousers on sitting down. And we were able to

concentrate our attention, more than we should otherwise, on the stage

effects, the lighting, the technique, the carpentry of the business.

But it was, I think, as a picture that the theatre there appealed

chiefly to us. The theatre in a small town tends to become, as it can

never hope to become in London, a social and intellectual centre. One

seemed there to be in touch with the life of Christiania. And it was

pleasant to stroll between the acts down the long promenade behind the

stalls, to watch the various groups greet and mingle and separate; to

walk up the wide-columned staircase and turn into the large

reception-rooms, with their gilt chairs and the inevitable bar for

snacks; the gruyère and ham sandwiches, and the Hansa Ol; and it was

pleasant to walk out into the cool air of the balcony and look out over

the city as it lay below us in light and shadow. In the immediate

foreground the stern statues of Ibsen and Björnson; the trees, the

gardens and the bandstand; beyond, the turreted house of parliament; and

on either side running parallel the bright thoroughfares of the Carl

Johansgate and the Storthingsgarten with their trams and restaurants and

throng of people.

A pretty picture, but one that might at such an hour wake sadly in the

heart of the young Norwegian a sense of life hasting from him. His whole

life would seem to be enclosed by the bright boundaries of those

streets, going no farther than the eye could see. A nation, he would

say, of three million people, a capital of two streets and a few

restaurants, and he would think regretfully of the scope and freedom of

other countries and other cities--London, America, New York.

A story might be well began there on the balcony of the National Theatre

in Christiania, with a young man confronted suddenly by the challenge of

his life’s tether; a young man dreaming of a world wider and more

glamorous than his own, a world that would hold fit employment for his

youth and courage and ambition. He would turn from the balcony with an

ache about him, and it might be that in the wide reception-room behind

it he would find himself suddenly beside the girl whose image had been

never long absent from his thoughts, and there would be comfort for him

in the sight of her cool skin and light flaxen hair and pale cornflower

blue eyes, eyes that would smile softly into his, that would seem to bid

him “take life easy as the grass grows on the weirs.” And her sweetness

would be cast as a net about him, entangling alike his dreams and

purpose and his discontent. They will say nothing: there will be no need

of words; but they will turn and walk out of the large room and stand

together alone and silent on the balcony, in the evening air, happy,

unutterably happy in their nearness one beside the other.

And he will never leave the city: he will be unfaithful to his dream; he

will build a chalet on the hills of Majorstuen. And his youth will pass;

and one evening he will stand again alone upon the balcony, and remember

how thirty years earlier he had stood there, dreaming of a wider city,

and the old ache will rise in him and he will wonder if he has been wise

to accept the immediate adventure, the adventure that lay to hand. He

will ask himself whether he might not have found elsewhere employment

for that faith and energy of which the years have robbed him.

Or it may be that he is faithful to his dream and faithless to his love;

that he goes to America and prospers there, and all that other side of

him, all that is not strong and hard and resolute, is crushed out in the

fierce antagonism of finance, the ruthless fight for wealth, and he

returns at length an old man to the country of his youth, to the city

that stretches unaltered beneath him in light and shadow: the stern

statues, the trees and garden, and the bright, thronged thoroughfare of

the Carl Johansgate; and at the end of the balcony there stands a young

man leaning, as he had leant thirty years earlier, against the stone of

the balustrade, and he is filled swiftly, unaccountably, with an envy

for that young man’s potentialities. “I was once,” he thinks, “all that

he is now. I, too, was young, and fresh and gracious. I, too, stood with

the twenties and the thirties at my feet, and what have I made of them?

While others played, I worked. And while I worked the magic and the

beauty of life passed by me. I made gold of the years that others turned

to poetry.” And he feels lonely, and turns with a shiver to the warm

lights at the back of him. And he starts, for it seems to him that there

has risen suddenly at his side a figure out of the past: a pale slim

girl with cool white skin and flaxen hair and pale cornflower blue eyes,

and he is deserted by that assurance that has won him so many contracts,

and he stammers and says, “But surely, somewhere,--forgive me, please;

but, haven’t we....” And there is a low laugh, and at his side a voice,

“But you should know her, she is my daughter.”

And turning, he sees all that her mother has become, and seeing it, sees

also his own youth buried there. And life seems to me an utterly empty

and worthless thing.

A story that perhaps Maupassant would have cared to write. For that was

one of his favourite devices to bring a man face to face suddenly with

the survival of his discarded self, and the theme is Maupassant’s; that

we get always the thing we ask for, but never as we ask for it, never

according to the letter of our desire.

V

Very quickly, very pleasantly it passed, our week in Christiania, with

driftings in and out of cafés, and visits to the chalet of an old friend

of Clifford’s, Von Erpecom Sem, on the heights of Holmenhollen, from

which we could see far below the harbour and fjords of Christiania. We

never saw it in the sunlight, in all its many-coloured beauty, but at

night we saw it; a long scattered stretch of twinkling lights across the

water; and agreed that it deserved all that the guide-books have ever

said of it.

I am not certain, though, that the best of that holiday was not the

waking in a sleeper at 7.30 on a Monday morning at King’s Cross with the

knowledge that in an hour’s time I should be at home. I should find, I

knew, something between fifty and sixty letters waiting for me, for I

have made it a rule never to have correspondence forwarded to me when I

go away. There would be certainly something exciting for me in the

congregation of a fortnight’s letters. It was the first week in May; the

sun was shining out of a blue sky, with all the promise of summer’s

splendour. Lord’s and cricket, and long, lazy afternoons reading in a

deck-chair in the garden.

Once again the newspaper would become interesting. I should find myself

buying each successive issue of the _Evening News_ to know if Hearne was

still not out at Lord’s. And once again at about three o’clock would

steal over me that dissatisfaction with the manuscript that lay

unfinished on my desk in front of me. My hand would steal out towards

the receiver of the telephone. “Paddington 144. Yes: is that Lord’s?

Middlesex batting,--189 for 3. Thank you very much.” And within half an

hour I shall be sitting on the sun-baked gallery of the pavilion.

They pass so quickly those four golden months, that we are hardly

conscious of their passage till the time comes for us to walk, at the

close of the last match, wistfully across an emptying ground.

For eight months Lord’s will be shut; we shall pass by it on the ’bus,

and the white seats of the mound will be empty. A few groundsmen will be

pottering about; someone will be rolling the practice pitch. We shall

stand up on the ’bus as we go by, for one always does stand up on a ’bus

as one passes Lord’s; but no longer shall we crane our necks to read the

figures on the telegraph, or peer eagerly to distinguish the players, to

see whether it is Hearne or Hendren that is still not out. The season is

not over yet, of course; there is still the Scarborough festival, and

the champion county has to meet England at the Oval. But these games

were, after all, an anti-climax; for the true cricketer the season is at

an end when the last ball is bowled at Lord’s.

At first we are not too sorry. Four months is a long time at even the

best of games, and it is pleasant to think that in a fortnight’s time we

shall be getting out our football jerseys and putting new bars upon our

boots. It will be great fun going down to the Old Deer Park for the

trial games and meeting our old friends. Soon the season will be really

started, and every Tuesday morning will bring the yellow card: “You have

been selected to play for ‘A’ XV _v._ Exiles, or Harlequins ‘A,’ or Old

Alleynians.” And then on Saturday we shall let the District Railway

carry us out to strange places--Northfields and Boston Manor--places

whose names are familiar to us on the tubes, but are distant in the

imagination, like Chimborazo and Cotopaxi, places where we never expect

anyone to live. For members of an ‘A’ XV life is always an adventure;

and then, when the game is over, and we sit back in the carriage lazy

and tired, it is amusing to read through the soccer results in the

evening paper and learn that at Stamford Bridge 40,000 people saw “Cock

outwit the custodian and net the ball in the first three minutes.” And

afterwards we go on to Dehem’s and meet our friends from the other

games, and eat a great deal of roast beef, and drink a great deal of

beer. Oh, yes, there are many compensations for the loss of summer! The

autumn passes quickly and pleasantly, but towards Christmas there will

come, as there always must come, an evening when we shall sit over the

fire and remember suddenly that it is four months since we have held a

cricket bat, that May is still a long way off, and the procession of

Saturdays seems endless. On such an evening we take down _Wisden_ and,

long after our usual bedtime, pore over the old scores.

For _Wisden_ is the cricketer’s bible, though the unbaptized make mock

of it. “What is it,” they say, “but a record? We can understand your

wanting to look at the scores of matches that you have seen, that will

recall to you pleasant hours in pleasant company. But what possible

enjoyment can you derive from the bare figures and accounts of games you

have never watched, on grounds you have never been to? It is no doubt an

admirable work of reference for the statistician, but as literature, as

a thing that is read for pleasure! why, it reminds us of the half-pay

major who spent his evenings reading the Army List of 1860!”

It is hard to explain. In the same way that the letters _x_ and _y_

possess a significance for the mathematician, so for the cricketer these

bare figures are a symbol and a story. We can clothe the skeleton with

flesh. We can picture the scene. We know what the score-board looked

like when that seventh wicket fell; we can gauge the value of

Strudwick’s 5 not out. When we read, “Ducat, l.b.w. b. Woolley 12”; we

can imagine the emotion of the man sitting at the end of the free seats

below the telegraph. “If only Ducat can stay in,” he had thought,

“Surrey may win yet. There are several people who might stop at the

other end while he gets the runs.” But the umpire’s finger rose, and we

know the depression with which he wrote on the thumb-marked score-card

“l.b.w. b. Woolley 12,” and then pulled himself together, prepared to

watch “in a dream untroubled of hope” the inevitable end delayed for a

few minutes by Smith and Rushby.

That for the games one has not seen. But for those that one has

seen,--for them, _Wisden_ indeed becomes almost an autobiography. Our

cricket life, or rather the passive, the contemplative side of it, is

written there; and I am not sure that the receptive side is not the more

important. We only write, I sometimes think, to bring ourselves closer

to great writing; so that through our own fumblings after

self-expression we shall come to an understanding of the difficulties

that great writers have had to face, and a consequent appreciation of

their triumphs. Certainly had we not spent hours of scratching at a net,

learning to get our left shoulder over to the line of ball, we should

not feel so intensely the thrill of pleasure that Spooner’s off-drive

brings to us. It may well be that the hours of spent energy are an

apprenticeship for the intellectual calm of an afternoon at Lord’s.

Not always calm, though. Cricket, for all its leisure, is in its

long-drawn expectation the most emotional of games. It has not,

doubtless, any equivalent for the delirium of a try at Twickenham. But

then cricket does not aim at that particular sensation. It is drama, not

melodrama. Its atmosphere is heavily charged, one’s nerves are geared

high, one fidgets awkwardly in one’s seat. The effect is one of

continuously suspended action. One is always wondering. As often as not

the tension passes. The climax is never reached. I have watched a good

deal of cricket, but I have seen only four, five, at the most six, big

finishes.

There was that Middlesex and Essex game in 1910. On the whole, I am

inclined to think the most remarkable match I have ever seen. From the

very start it was remarkable. I arrived at lunch-time to find Essex

batting, with 93 runs on the board for the loss of two wickets. Half an

hour later they were all out for 110. J. W. Hearne, an unknown bowler

then, took seven wickets for no runs. And I shall not easily forget the

excitement and the pride of that last afternoon, when Middlesex, with

242 to win, lost eight wickets for 142. The pitch was bad. Buchenham was

bowling, as at that time Buchenham alone could bowl. Warner was still

in; but there was only Mignon to come, a bad bat even among fast

bowlers, and a newcomer to county cricket, who had made a duck in the

first innings and batted quite indifferently against Surrey in the

previous week. But in an hour Warner and S. H. Saville had won the

match.

A memorable evening. We had resigned ourselves to defeat. “They can’t do

it,” we had said; “it’s no use worrying. Let’s buy an evening paper and

see how Somerset are doing against Kent.” And we had smiled indulgently

when the boundaries began to come. “Fireworks,” we had said, and

remarked that it was rather stupid to have a tea interval. “They might

just as well,” we said, “have finished the thing off first.” But

something warned us not to leave the ground.

And they came in forty minutes, the last seventy-three runs; a glorious

forty minutes. Our indifference turning to a wondering hope: “Can they;

is it possible?” And then the recurring certainty they would. Forty

such minutes as come rarely in a lifetime.

Then there was the Kent match in ’21, when Middlesex, with the

championship to win, made over three hundred runs in four hours, to win

the match; then the great battle four days later against Surrey. And as

I correct these proofs I feel that, in spite of the printer’s bill, it

would be ungenerous in me to pay no tribute to the second day of this

year’s Sussex game at Lord’s. It began dingily enough, with a dull sky

and a cold wind, and H. L. Dales taking ninety minutes to make sixteen.

But fortunately I spent that first hour or so in the warm comfort of a

tube. And after lunch the sun came out; the cricket became exciting, and

the afternoon grew into one of the happiest that I have ever spent at

Lord’s. The excitement, curiously enough, was focussed on a battle for a

first innings lead. Usually one does not enthuse about points on the

first innings. But one is out to enjoy oneself on a Whit Monday. There

is in the presence of a big crowd the contagion of a herd emotion. And

certainly the cricket was very good. Sussex is the best fielding side in

England; I am not certain that J. W. Hearne is not to-day the finest

batsman in the world. And the afternoon was a long struggle between

Hearne and Sussex.

I have not the exact figures by me, but Middlesex wanted some 311 runs

for their two points, and seven wickets were down with the follow-on

still unsaved, when Twining came in to partner Hearne. On some of his

partners Hearne must, I think, exert a magnetic influence. Certainly

Twining, when he is in with him, looks and is a fifty per cent. better

player than when Lee or Hendren is at the other end. He has never done

anything comparable with the great partnership with Hearne that won

Middlesex the championship in 1921. Indeed, I rather think that his

fifty-seven not out that Whit Monday afternoon is his second highest

score in a county match. A useful rather than a good innings, perhaps,

but he stayed there; and I doubt if I ever saw a finer innings than

Hearne’s 140.

Some people find Hearne dull, as some people find Tolstoy dull. He has

not the volcanic, the eruptive vigour of Hendren and Dostoieffsky. He is

moving with a complete economy of effort towards a very distant point.

Where other batsmen think in fifties, he thinks in double centuries. He

knows exactly what he is doing all the time. Batsmen like Holmes and

Mead and Ducat get there somehow in the end; but they have not all the

time the end in view, or rather, perhaps, the spectator as he watches

them, has not the end in view. Holmes, whether he makes a cypher or a

century, never looks anything but an ordinary player. Hearne is a great

batsman the moment he walks on to the field. No one who knows anything

about cricket could see him play one stroke and have any doubts as to

his quality.

But it was after Hearne was out leg-before to Gilligan and Murrell had

failed, that the excitement really started. Twelve runs were wanted, I

think, when Durston came in to bat. They got them somehow, amazingly,

but they got them. There was a shriek of hysterical excitement every

time the ball hit the middle of the bat and trickled safely to mid on.

There were byes, and there was an overthrow, and miraculously Durston

turned Gilligan to leg and along the ground. It is the only good stroke

that I have ever seen him make. Sometimes I think I am uncharitable to

Durston. “He is not so awfully bad,” I tell myself, “not worse, really,

than Mignon was, or Rushby. It is only that there is so much of him to

look incompetent.” And then I see him bat again and I say, “No, really

he is absolutely the worst, without exception the worst. There can be no

man living whom the captain could, save as a practical joke, put in No.

11 for a side of which Durston was a member.” But on Whit Monday, when

he made that stroke for two off Gilligan, he was cheered as has rarely

any stroke by Hobbs been cheered, and the large, jolly, holiday crowd

poured homewards the happier for his batting.

Every summer has its own landmarks, its own sensations, its own big

matches; even this cold and miserable spring of numb fingers and dropped

catches. There is no season so poor that we cannot look back to it for

some things gratefully. And the future will be as good; better, perhaps.

And yet----. I wonder whether ever again there will be a day at Lord’s

to equal that of the 31st of August three years ago.

No cricketer will need me to remind him of what happened then, or to

retell the story of “Plum” Warner’s last and greatest match. Enough to

say that it was the most dramatic, the most fitting thing that has

happened in any sport in any country. If no championship even had been

at stake it would have been a great, a memorable match. With the

championship dependent on the result it was a titanic battle. But with

the added sentiment of Warner’s last appearance--such things come only

once in a generation.

I was not there on the first day. I was playing cricket at Hayward’s

Heath, and I remember the excitement with which I tore open the first

issue of the _Evening Argus_ to see which side had won the toss.

Middlesex batting. I gave a sigh of relief. That will be all right, I

thought. A plumb wicket. The Surrey bowling is weak. They took all day

yesterday to get out Northampton. There will be three hundred on the

board by six o’clock; and then came edition after edition with the news

that things were not going well at Lord’s. Lee out, Hearne out. Hendren

only 41; 109 for 5; 149 for 6. And then tardily in the last issue news

of a stand starting between Warner and Greville Stevens.

But even so, it was not good enough. To bat all day and only make 250.

And all through the Monday I watched hour by hour the match and

championship slip away. Catches were put down; the bowling had no sting.

And in the intervals one read on the tape machine of the manner of mess

that Lancashire were making of Worcester in the north. I left the ground

when Fender declared his innings closed. Seventy-three runs behind. Only

a day left for play. We could make a draw of it probably if we wanted

to. But only with a win could we win the championship. It was no use.

It was over. Better not see the end.

And yet I went down there on the Tuesday. There was still a chance;

should we win, I should never forgive myself had I not been there to

cheer the team. And hope came back to me when I met “Skipper” Pawling on

the steps of the pavilion. “It’s all right, my boy,” he said; “it’s all

right. We’ll just manage it.” Mrs Warner had come down with white

heather for the professionals. And I can still hear the eager,

high-pitched tension of her voice, “We shall do it, shan’t we, Mr

Pawling.” I am not certain that Sydney Pawling is not the most vivid

memory to me of that long August day. I can see him drawing his great

hand across his mouth; I can see him muttering when Hearne came in to

bat, “He’s looking ill; fine drawn. I must send him over some champagne;

some champagne.” And I can remember him almost in tears at the end of

the day as the Surrey wickets fell.

But then we were all of us, I think, very near to tears at the end of

that great evening. When I went to Lord’s for the first time in a sailor

suit in the spring of 1904, I cried when Warner’s wicket fell, and I

rather think I cried at the end of it all at twenty past six on the

thirty-first of August, when the huge crowd swept over the playing field

and carried him shoulder high to the pavilion.

Will Lord’s ever see such a scene again? Will Lord’s ever again know

anything to equal the excitement of that last hour, from the moment when

Hendren caught Shepherd high over his left shoulder as he backed

against the screen? It was the turning-point, that catch. In half the

time Surrey had got half the runs, and only two wickets had gone down.

Then came that catch which only Hendren could have held off a stroke

that from the other end would have been a six. It was a match again.

Fender came in next; there was an awful hush. Half an hour of Fender and

the match was Surrey’s. But he hit right across a straight length ball

from Durston. 112-4-1. Still there was Peach to come, and Reay, and

Hitch and Ducat, with Sandham batting beautifully at the other end. The

odds were still on Surrey. But Hearne and Stevens did not fail their

captain in that last hour. Hendren, of all people, missed Hitch low down

at mid-wicket, but the bowlers could afford to do without their

fielders. Wicket after wicket fell. 176 for 9, and Rushby came in,

swinging his arms, while the crowd laughed. Rushby, a clown batsman;

nothing more. But he stood there, and singles began to come; and one

looked at the clock and reminded oneself that Rushby had once stayed in

while Crawford put on 80. Twelve runs in ten minutes; would the end

never come? Then an unplayable ball from Stevens. It was all over. The

ball trickled to short leg. Hearne and Hendren rushed from the slips

after it. Hearne got there first, ran with his “souvenir” to the

pavilion. And the great crowd swarmed about the wicket.

I do not expect ever to see again anything to equal it. But I am proud

and glad to have been there, to have taken part in that tribute to the

greatest hearted cricketer the world has ever known.

Myself When Young: Confessions · 第 6 / 18 题