r. f. murray-第5部分
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Murray was already doing a very little ‘miniature journalism；' in the form of University Notes for a local paper。 He complains of the ultra Caledonian frankness with which men told him that they were very bad。 A needless； if friendly； outspokenness was a feature in Scottish character which he did not easily endure。 He wrote a good deal of verse in the little University paper； now called College Echoes。
If Murray ever had any definite idea of being ordained for the ministry in any ‘denomination；' he abandoned it。 His ‘bursaries' （scholarships or exhibitions）； on which he had been passing rich； expired； and he had to earn a livelihood。 It seems plain to myself that he might easily have done so with his pen。 A young friend of my own （who will excuse me for thinking that his bright verses are not BETTER than Murray's） promptly made； by these alone； an income which to Murray would have been affluence。 But this could not be done at St。 Andrews。 Again； Murray was not in contact with people in the centre of newspapers and magazines。 He went very little into general society； even at St。 Andrews； and thus failed； perhaps； to make acquaintances who might have been ‘useful。' He would have scorned the idea of making useful acquaintances。 But without seeking them； why should we reject any friendliness when it offers itself？ We are all members one of another。 Murray speaks of his experience of human beings； as rich in examples of kindness and good…will。 His shyness； his reserve； his extreme unselfishness； carried to the point of diffidence；made him rather shun than seek older people who were dangerously likely to be serviceable。 His manner； when once he could be induced to meet strangers； was extremely frank and pleasant； but from meeting strangers he shrunk； in his inveterate modesty。
In 1886 Murray had the misfortune to lose is father； and it became； perhaps； more prominently needful that he should find a profession。 He now assisted Professor Meiklejohn of St。 Andrews in various kinds of literary and academic work； and in him found a friend； with whom he remained in close intercourse to the last。 He began the weary path； which all literary beginners must tread； of sending contributions to magazines。 He seldom read magazine articles。 ‘I do not greatly care for 〃Problems〃 and 〃vexed questions。〃 I am so much of a problem and a vexed question that I have quite enough to do in searching for a solution of my own personality。' He tried a story； based on ‘a midnight experience' of his own； unluckily he does not tell us what that experience was。 Had he encountered one of the local ghosts？
‘My blood…curdling romance I offered to the editor of Longman's Magazine； but that misguided person was so ill…advised as to return it； accompanied with one of these abominable lithographed forms conveying his hypocritical regrets。' Murray sent a directed envelope with a twopenny…halfpenny stamp。 The paper came back for three…halfpence by book…post。 ‘I have serious thoughts of sueing him for the odd penny！' ‘Why should people be fools enough to read my rot when they have twenty volumes of Scott at their command？' He confesses to ‘a Scott…mania almost as intense as if he were the last new sensation。' ‘I was always fond of him； but I am fonder than ever now。' This plunge into the immortal romances seems really to have discouraged Murray； at all events he says very little more about attempts in fiction of his own。 ‘I am a barren rascal；' he writes； quoting Johnson on Fielding。 Like other men； Murray felt extreme difficulty in writing articles or tales which have an infinitesimal chance of being accepted。 It needs a stout heart to face this almost fixed certainty of rejection： a man is weakened by his apprehensions of a lithographed form； and of his old manuscript coming home to roost； like the Graces of Theocritus； to pine in the dusty chest where is their chill abode。 If the Alexandrian poets knew this ill…fortune； so do all beginners in letters。 There is nothing for it but ‘putting a stout heart to a stey brae；' as the Scotch proverb says。 Editors want good work； and on finding a new man who is good； they greatly rejoice。 But it is so difficult to do vigorous and spontaneous work； as it were； in the dark。 Murray had not； it is probable； the qualities of the novelist； the narrator。 An excellent critic he might have been if he had ‘descended to criticism；' but he had； at this time； no introductions； and probably did not address reviews at random to editors。 As to poetry； these much…vexed men receive such enormous quantities of poetry that they usually reject it at a venture； and obtain the small necessary supplies from agreeable young ladies。 Had Murray been in London； with a few literary friends； he might soon have been a thriving writer of light prose and light verse。 But the enchantress held him； he hated London； he had no literary friends； he could write gaily for pleasure； not for gain。 So； like the Scholar Gypsy； he remained contemplative；
‘Waiting for the spark from heaven to fall。'
About this time the present writer was in St。 Andrews as Gifford Lecturer in Natural Theology。 To say that an enthusiasm for totems and taboos； ghosts and gods of savage men； was aroused by these lectures； would be to exaggerate unpardonably。 Efforts to make the students write essays or ask questions were so entire a failure that only one question was receivedas to the proper pronunciation of ‘Myth。' Had one been fortunate enough to interest Murray； it must have led to some discussion of his literary attempts。 He mentions having attended a lecture given by myself to the Literary Society on ‘Literature as a Profession；' and he found the lecturer ‘far more at home in such a subject than in the Gifford Lectures。' Possibly the hearer was ‘more at home' in literature than in discussions as to the origin of Huitzilopochtli。 ‘Literature；' he says； ‘never was； is not； and never will be； in the ordinary sense of the term； a profession。 You can't teach it as you can the professions； you can't succeed in it as you can in the professions； by dint of mere diligence and without special aptitude 。 。 。 I think all this chatter about the technical and pecuniary sides of literature is extremely foolish and worse than useless。 It only serves to glut the idle curiosity of the general public about matters with which they have no concern； a curiosity which （thanks partly to American methods of journalism） has become simply outrageous。'
Into chatter about the pecuniary aspect of literature the Lecturer need hardly say that he did not meander。 It is absolutely true that literature cannot be taught。 Maupassant could have dispensed with the instructions of Flaubert。 But an ‘aptitude' is needed in all professions； and in such arts as music； and painting； and sculpture； teaching is necessary。 In literature； teaching can only come from general education in letters； from experience； from friendly private criticism。 But if you cannot succeed in literature ‘by dint of mere diligence；' mere diligence is absolutely essential。 Men must read； must observe； must practise。 Diligence is as necessary to the author as to the grocer； the solicitor； the dentist； the barrister； the soldier。 Nothing but nature can give the aptitude； diligence must improve it； and experience may direct it。 It is not enough to wait for the spark from heaven to fall； the spark must be caught； and tended； and cherished。 A man must labour till he finds his vein； and himself。 Again； if literature is an art； it is also a profession。 A man's very first duty is to support himself and those； if any； who are dependent on him。 If he cannot do it by epics； tragedies； lyrics； he must do it by articles； essays； tales； or how he honestly can。 He must win his leisure by his labour； and give his leisure to his art。 Murray； at this time； was diligent in helping to compile and correct educational works。 He might； but for the various conditions of reserve； hatred of towns； and the rest； have been earning his leisure by work more brilliant and more congenial to most men。 But his theory of literature was so lofty that he probably found the other； the harder； the less remunerative； the less attractive work； more congenial to his tastes。
He describes； to Mrs。 Murray； various notable visitors to St。 Andrews： Professor Butcher； who lectured on Lucian； and is ‘very handsome；' Mr。 Arthur Balfour； the Lord Rector； who is ‘rather handsome；' and delights the listener by his eloquence； Mr。 Chamberlain； who pleases him too； though he finds Mr。 Chamberlain rather acrimonious in his political reflections。 About Lucian； the subject of Mr。 Butcher's lecture； Murray says nothing。 That brilliant man of letters in general； the Alcibiades of literature； the wittiest； and； rarely； the most tender； and； always； the most graceful； was a model who does not seem to have attracted Murray。 Lucian amused； and amuses； and lived by amusing： the vein of romance and poetry that was his he worked but rarely： perhaps the Samosatene did not take himself too seriously； yet he lives through the ages； an example； in many ways to be followed； of a man who obviously delighted in all that he wrought。 He was no model to Murray； who only delighted in his moments of inspiration； and could not make himself happy even in the trifles which are demanded from the professional pen。
He did； at last； endeavour to ply that servile engine of which Pendennis conceived so exalted an opinion。 Certainly a false pride did not stand in his way when； on May 5； 1889； he announced that he was about to leave St。 Andrews； and attempt to get work at proof… correcting and in the humblest sorts of journalism in Edinburgh。 The chapter is honourable to his resolution； but most melancholy。 There were competence and ease waiting for him； probably； in London； if he would but let his pen have its way in bright comment and occasional verse。 But he chose the other course。 With letters of introduction from Mr。 Meiklejohn； he consulted the houses of Messrs。 Clark and Messrs。 Constable in Edinburgh。 He did not find that his knowledge of Greek was adequate to the higher and more remunerative branches of proof…reading； that weary meticulous toil； so fatig
