heretics- 第30部分

because　I　anticipate　a　decrease　in　life。　　I　do　not　think　that　under



modern　Western　materialism　we　should　have　anarchy。　　I　doubt　whether　we



should　have　enough　individual　valour　and　spirit　even　to　have　liberty。



It　is　quite　an　old…fashioned　fallacy　to　suppose　that　our　objection



to　scepticism　is　that　it　removes　the　discipline　from　life。



Our　objection　to　scepticism　is　that　it　removes　the　motive　power。



Materialism　is　not　a　thing　which　destroys　mere　restraint。



Materialism　itself　is　the　great　restraint。　　The　McCabe　school



advocates　a　political　liberty；　but　it　denies　spiritual　liberty。



That　is；　it　abolishes　the　laws　which　could　be　broken；　and　substitutes



laws　that　cannot。　　And　that　is　the　real　slavery。







The　truth　is　that　the　scientific　civilization　in　which　Mr。　McCabe



believes　has　one　rather　particular　defect；　it　is　perpetually　tending



to　destroy　that　democracy　or　power　of　the　ordinary　man　in　which



Mr。　McCabe　also　believes。　　Science　means　specialism；　and　specialism



means　oligarchy。　　If　you　once　establish　the　habit　of　trusting



particular　men　to　produce　particular　results　in　physics　or　astronomy；



you　leave　the　door　open　for　the　equally　natural　demand　that　you



should　trust　particular　men　to　do　particular　things　in　government



and　the　coercing　of　men。　　If；　you　feel　it　to　be　reasonable　that



one　beetle　should　be　the　only　study　of　one　man；　and　that　one　man



the　only　student　of　that　one　beetle；　it　is　surely　a　very　harmless



consequence　to　go　on　to　say　that　politics　should　be　the　only　study



of　one　man；　and　that　one　man　the　only　student　of　politics。



As　I　have　pointed　out　elsewhere　in　this　book；　the　expert　is　more



aristocratic　than　the　aristocrat；　because　the　aristocrat　is　only



the　man　who　lives　well；　while　the　expert　is　the　man　who　knows　better。



But　if　we　look　at　the　progress　of　our　scientific　civilization　we　see



a　gradual　increase　everywhere　of　the　specialist　over　the　popular　function。



Once　men　sang　together　round　a　table　in　chorus；　now　one　man



sings　alone；　for　the　absurd　reason　that　he　can　sing　better。



If　scientific　civilization　goes　on　（which　is　most　improbable）



only　one　man　will　laugh；　because　he　can　laugh　better　than　the　rest。







I　do　not　know　that　I　can　express　this　more　shortly　than　by　taking



as　a　text　the　single　sentence　of　Mr。　McCabe；　which　runs　as　follows：



〃The　ballets　of　the　Alhambra　and　the　fireworks　of　the　Crystal　Palace



and　Mr。　Chesterton's　Daily　News　articles　have　their　places　in　life。〃



I　wish　that　my　articles　had　as　noble　a　place　as　either　of　the　other



two　things　mentioned。　　But　let　us　ask　ourselves　（in　a　spirit　of　love；



as　Mr。　Chadband　would　say）；　what　are　the　ballets　of　the　Alhambra？



The　ballets　of　the　Alhambra　are　institutions　in　which　a　particular



selected　row　of　persons　in　pink　go　through　an　operation　known



as　dancing。　　Now；　in　all　commonwealths　dominated　by　a　religion



in　the　Christian　commonwealths　of　the　Middle　Ages　and　in　many



rude　societiesthis　habit　of　dancing　was　a　common　habit　with　everybody；



and　was　not　necessarily　confined　to　a　professional　class。



A　person　could　dance　without　being　a　dancer；　a　person　could　dance



without　being　a　specialist；　a　person　could　dance　without　being　pink。



And；　in　proportion　as　Mr。　McCabe's　scientific　civilization　advances



that　is；　in　proportion　as　religious　civilization　（or　real　civilization）



decaysthe　more　and　more　〃well　trained；〃　the　more　and　more　pink；



become　the　people　who　do　dance；　and　the　more　and　more　numerous　become



the　people　who　don't。　Mr。　McCabe　may　recognize　an　example　of　what　I



mean　in　the　gradual　discrediting　in　society　of　the　ancient　European



waltz　or　dance　with　partners；　and　the　substitution　of　that　horrible



and　degrading　oriental　interlude　which　is　known　as　skirt…dancing。



That　is　the　whole　essence　of　decadence；　the　effacement　of　five



people　who　do　a　thing　for　fun　by　one　person　who　does　it　for　money。



Now　it　follows；　therefore；　that　when　Mr。　McCabe　says　that　the　ballets



of　the　Alhambra　and　my　articles　〃have　their　place　in　life；〃



it　ought　to　be　pointed　out　to　him　that　he　is　doing　his　best



to　create　a　world　in　which　dancing；　properly　speaking；　will　have



no　place　in　life　at　all。　　He　is；　indeed；　trying　to　create　a　world



in　which　there　will　be　no　life　for　dancing　to　have　a　place　in。



The　very　fact　that　Mr。　McCabe　thinks　of　dancing　as　a　thing



belonging　to　some　hired　women　at　the　Alhambra　is　an　illustration



of　the　same　principle　by　which　he　is　able　to　think　of　religion



as　a　thing　belonging　to　some　hired　men　in　white　neckties。



Both　these　things　are　things　which　should　not　be　done　for　us；



but　by　us。　　If　Mr。　McCabe　were　really　religious　he　would　be　happy。



If　he　were　really　happy　he　would　dance。







Briefly；　we　may　put　the　matter　in　this　way。　　The　main　point　of　modern



life　is　not　that　the　Alhambra　ballet　has　its　place　in　life。



The　main　point；　the　main　enormous　tragedy　of　modern　life；



is　that　Mr。　McCabe　has　not　his　place　in　the　Alhambra　ballet。



The　joy　of　changing　and　graceful　posture；　the　joy　of　suiting　the　swing



of　music　to　the　swing　of　limbs；　the　joy　of　whirling　drapery；



the　joy　of　standing　on　one　leg；all　these　should　belong　by　rights



to　Mr。　McCabe　and　to　me；　in　short；　to　the　ordinary　healthy　citizen。



Probably　we　should　not　consent　to　go　through　these　evolutions。



But　that　is　because　we　are　miserable　moderns　and　rationalists。



We　do　not　merely　love　ourselves　more　than　we　love　duty；　we　actually



love　ourselves　more　than　we　love　joy。







When；　therefore；　Mr。　McCabe　says　that　he　gives　the　Alhambra　dances



（and　my　articles）　their　place　in　life；　I　think　we　are　justified



in　pointing　out　that　by　the　very　nature　of　the　case　of　his　philosophy



and　of　his　favourite　civilization　he　gives　them　a　very　inadequate　place。



For　（if　I　may　pursue　the　too　flattering　parallel）　Mr。　McCabe　thinks



of　the　Alhambra　and　of　my　articles　as　two　very　odd　and　absurd　things；



which　some　special　people　do　（probably　for　money）　in　order　to　amuse　him。



But　if　he　had　ever　felt　himself　the　ancient；　sublime；　elemental；



human　instinct　to　dance；　he　would　have　discovered　that　dancing



is　not　a　frivolous　thing　at　all；　but　a　very　serious　thing。



He　would　have　discovered　that　it　is　the　one　grave　and　chaste



and　decent　method　of　expressing　a　certain　class　of　emotions。



And　similarly；　if　he　had　ever　had；　as　Mr。　Shaw　and　I　have　had；



the　impulse　to　what　he　calls　paradox；　he　would　have　discovered　that



paradox　again　is　not　a　frivolous　thing；　but　a　very　serious　thing。



He　would　have　found　that　paradox　simply　means　a　certain　defiant



joy　which　belongs　to　belief。　　I　should　regard　any　civilization



which　was　without　a　universal　habit　of　uproarious　dancing　as　being；



from　the　full　human　point　of　view；　a　defective　civilization。



And　I　should　regard　any　mind　which　had　not　got　the　habit



in　one　form　or　another　of　uproarious　thinking　as　being；



from　the　full　human　point　of　view；　a　defective　mind。



It　is　vain　for　Mr。　McCabe　to　say　that　a　ballet　is　a　part　of　him。



He　should　be　part　of　a　ballet；　or　else　he　is　only　part　of　a　man。



It　is　in　vain　for　him　to　say　that　he　is　〃not　quarrelling



with　the　importation　of　humour　into　the　controversy。〃



He　ought　himself　to　be　importing　humour　into　every　controversy；



for　unless　a　man　is　in　part　a　humorist；　he　is　only　in　part　a　man。



To　sum　up　the　whole　matter　very　simply；　if　Mr。　McCabe　asks　me　why　I



import　frivolity　into　a　discussion　of　the　nature　of　man；　I　answer；



because　frivolity　is　a　part　of　the　nature　of　man。　　If　he　asks　me　why



I　introduce　what　he　calls　paradoxes　into　a　philosophical　problem；



I　answer；　because　all　philosophical　problems　tend　to　become　paradoxical。



If　he　objects　to　my　treating　of　life　riotously；　I　reply　that　life



is　a　riot。　　And　I　say　that　the　Universe　as　I　see　it；　at　any　rate；



is　very　much　more　like　the　fireworks　at　the　Crystal　Palace　than　it



is　like　his　own　philosophy。　　About　the　whole　cosmos　there　is　a　tense



and　secret　festivitylike　preparations　for　Guy　Fawkes'　day。



Eternity　is　the　eve　of　something。　　I　never　look　up　at　the　stars



without　feeling　that　they　are　the　fires　of　a　schoolboy's　rocket；



fixed　in　their　everlasting　fall。















XVII　On　the　Wit　of　Whistler











That　capable　and　ingenious　writer；　Mr。　Arthur　Symons；



has　included　in　a　book　of　essays　recently　published；　I　believe；



an　apologia　for　〃London　Nights；〃　in　which　he　says　that　morality



should　be　wholly　subordinated　to　art　in　criticism；　and　he　uses



the　somewhat　singular　argument　that　art　or　the　worship　of　beauty



is　the　same　in　all　ages；　while　morality　differs　in　every　period



and　in　every　respect。　　He　appears　to　defy　his　critics　or　his



readers　to　mention　any　permanent　feature　or　quality　in　ethics。



This　is　surely　a　very　curious　example　of　that　extravagant　bias



against　morality　which　makes　so　many　ultra…modern　aesthetes　as　morbid



and　fanatical　as　any　Eastern　hermit。　　Unquestionably　it　is　a　very



common　phrase　of　modern　intellectualism　to　say　that　the　morality



of　one　age　can　be　entirely　different　to　the　morality　of　another。



And　like　a　great　many　other　phrases　of　modern　intellectualism；



it　means　literally　nothing　at　all。　　If　the　two　moralities



are　entirely　different；　why　do　you　call　them　both　moralities？



It　is　as　if　a　man　said；　〃Camels　in　various　places　are　totally　diverse；



some　have　six　legs；　some　have　none；　some　have　scales；　some　have　feathers；



some　have　horns；　some　have　wings；　some　are　green；　some　are　triangular。



There　is　no　point　which　t