the way of all flesh-第43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！


had　arrived　at　years　of　indiscretion。

Even　to　the　end　of　his　career　at　Cambridge　he　was　not　aware　that　he
had　it　in　him　to　do　anything；　but　others　had　begun　to　see　that　he
was　not　wanting　in　ability　and　sometimes　told　him　so。　　He　did　not
believe　it；　indeed　he　knew　very　well　that　if　they　thought　him　clever
they　were　being　taken　in；　but　it　pleased　him　to　have　been　able　to
take　them　in；　and　he　tried　to　do　so　still　further；　he　was　therefore
a　good　deal　on　the　look…out　for　cants　that　he　could　catch　and　apply
in　season；　and　might　have　done　himself　some　mischief　thus　if　he　had
not　been　ready　to　throw　over　any　cant　as　soon　as　he　had　come　across
another　more　nearly　to　his　fancy；　his　friends　used　to　say　that　when
he　rose　he　flew　like　a　snipe；　darting　several　times　in　various
directions　before　he　settled　down　to　a　steady　straight　flight；　but
when　he　had　once　got　into　this　he　would　keep　to　it。



CHAPTER　XLVI



When　he　was　in　his　third　year　a　magazine　was　founded　at　Cambridge；
the　contributions　to　which　were　exclusively　by　undergraduates。
Ernest　sent　in　an　essay　upon　the　Greek　Drama；　which　he　has　declined
to　let　me　reproduce　here　without　his　being　allowed　to　re…edit　it。　　I
have　therefore　been　unable　to　give　it　in　its　original　form；　but　when
pruned　of　its　redundancies　（and　this　is　all　that　has　been　done　to
it）　it　runs　as　follows　…


〃I　shall　not　attempt　within　the　limits　at　my　disposal　to　make　a
resume　of　the　rise　and　progress　of　the　Greek　drama；　but　will　confine
myself　to　considering　whether　the　reputation　enjoyed　by　the　three
chief　Greek　tragedians；　AEschylus；　Sophocles　and　Euripides；　is　one
that　will　be　permanent；　or　whether　they　will　one　day　be　held　to　have
been　overrated。

〃Why；　I　ask　myself；　do　I　see　much　that　I　can　easily　admire　in　Homer；
Thucydides；　Herodotus；　Demosthenes；　Aristophanes；　Theocritus；　parts
of　Lucretius；　Horace's　satires　and　epistles；　to　say　nothing　of　other
ancient　writers；　and　yet　find　myself　at　once　repelled　by　even　those
works　of　AEschylus；　Sophocles　and　Euripides　which　are　most　generally
admired。

〃With　the　first…named　writers　I　am　in　the　hands　of　men　who　feel；　if
not　as　I　do；　still　as　I　can　understand　their　feeling；　and　as　I　am
interested　to　see　that　they　should　have　felt；　with　the　second　I　have
so　little　sympathy　that　I　cannot　understand　how　anyone　can　ever　have
taken　any　interest　in　them　whatever。　　Their　highest　flights　to　me
are　dull；　pompous　and　artificial　productions；　which；　if　they　were　to
appear　now　for　the　first　time；　would；　I　should　think；　either　fall
dead　or　be　severely　handled　by　the　critics。　　I　wish　to　know　whether
it　is　I　who　am　in　fault　in　this　matter；　or　whether　part　of　the　blame
may　not　rest　with　the　tragedians　themselves。

〃How　far　I　wonder　did　the　Athenians　genuinely　like　these　poets；　and
how　far　was　the　applause　which　was　lavished　upon　them　due　to　fashion
or　affectation？　　How　far；　in　fact；　did　admiration　for　the　orthodox
tragedians　take　that　place　among　the　Athenians　which　going　to　church
does　among　ourselves？

〃This　is　a　venturesome　question　considering　the　verdict　now
generally　given　for　over　two　thousand　years；　nor　should　I　have
permitted　myself　to　ask　it　if　it　had　not　been　suggested　to　me　by　one
whose　reputation　stands　as　high；　and　has　been　sanctioned　for　as　long
time　as　those　of　the　tragedians　themselves；　I　mean　by　Aristophanes。

〃Numbers；　weight　of　authority；　and　time；　have　conspired　to　place
Aristophanes　on　as　high　a　literary　pinnacle　as　any　ancient　writer；
with　the　exception　perhaps　of　Homer；　but　he　makes　no　secret　of
heartily　hating　Euripides　and　Sophocles；　and　I　strongly　suspect　only
praises　AEschylus　that　he　may　run　down　the　other　two　with　greater
impunity。　　For　after　all　there　is　no　such　difference　between
AEschylus　and　his　successors　as　will　render　the　former　very　good　and
the　latter　very　bad；　and　the　thrusts　at　AEschylus　which　Aristophanes
puts　into　the　mouth　of　Euripides　go　home　too　well　to　have　been
written　by　an　admirer。

〃It　may　be　observed　that　while　Euripides　accuses　AEschylus　of　being
'pomp…bundle…worded；'　which　I　suppose　means　bombastic　and　given　to
rodomontade；　AEschylus　retorts　on　Euripides　that　he　is　a　'gossip
gleaner；　a　describer　of　beggars；　and　a　rag…stitcher；'　from　which　it
may　be　inferred　that　he　was　truer　to　the　life　of　his　own　times　than
AEschylus　was。　　It　happens；　however；　that　a　faithful　rendering　of
contemporary　life　is　the　very　quality　which　gives　its　most　permanent
interest　to　any　work　of　fiction；　whether　in　literature　or　painting；
and　it　is　a　not　unnatural　consequence　that　while　only　seven　plays　by
AEschylus；　and　the　same　number　by　Sophocles；　have　come　down　to　us；
we　have　no　fewer　than　nineteen　by　Euripides。

〃This；　however；　is　a　digression；　the　question　before　us　is　whether
Aristophanes　really　liked　AEschylus　or　only　pretended　to　do　so。　　It
must　be　remembered　that　the　claims　of　AEschylus；　Sophocles　and
Euripides；　to　the　foremost　place　amongst　tragedians　were　held　to　be
as　incontrovertible　as　those　of　Dante；　Petrarch；　Tasso　and　Ariosto
to　be　the　greatest　of　Italian　poets；　are　held　among　the　Italians　of
to…day。　　If　we　can　fancy　some　witty；　genial　writer；　we　will　say　in
Florence；　finding　himself　bored　by　all　the　poets　I　have　named；　we
can　yet　believe　he　would　be　unwilling　to　admit　that　he　disliked　them
without　exception。　　He　would　prefer　to　think　he　could　see　something
at　any　rate　in　Dante；　whom　he　could　idealise　more　easily；　inasmuch
as　he　was　more　remote；　in　order　to　carry　his　countrymen　the　farther
with　him；　he　would　endeavour　to　meet　them　more　than　was　consistent
with　his　own　instincts。　　Without　some　such　palliation　as　admiration
for　one；　at　any　rate；　of　the　tragedians；　it　would　be　almost　as
dangerous　for　Aristophanes　to　attack　them　as　it　would　be　for　an
Englishman　now　to　say　that　he　did　not　think　very　much　of　the
Elizabethan　dramatists。　　Yet　which　of　us　in　his　heart　likes　any　of
the　Elizabethan　dramatists　except　Shakespeare？　　Are　they　in　reality
anything　else　than　literary　Struldbrugs？

〃I　conclude　upon　the　whole　that　Aristophanes　did　not　like　any　of　the
tragedians；　yet　no　one　will　deny　that　this　keen；　witty；　outspoken
writer　was　as　good　a　judge　of　literary　value；　and　as　able　to　see　any
beauties　that　the　tragic　dramas　contained　as　nine…tenths；　at　any
rate；　of　ourselves。　　He　had；　moreover；　the　advantage　of　thoroughly
understanding　the　standpoint　from　which　the　tragedians　expected
their　work　to　be　judged；　and　what　was　his　conclusion？　　Briefly　it
was　little　else　than　this；　that　they　were　a　fraud　or　something　very
like　it。　　For　my　own　part　I　cordially　agree　with　him。　　I　am　free　to
confess　that　with　the　exception　perhaps　of　some　of　the　Psalms　of
David　I　know　no　writings　which　seem　so　little　to　deserve　their
reputation。　　I　do　not　know　that　I　should　particularly　mind　my
sisters　reading　them；　but　I　will　take　good　care　never　to　read　them
myself。〃


This　last　bit　about　the　Psalms　was　awful；　and　there　was　a　great
fight　with　the　editor　as　to　whether　or　no　it　should　be　allowed　to
stand。　　Ernest　himself　was　frightened　at　it；　but　he　had　once　heard
someone　say　that　the　Psalms　were　many　of　them　very　poor；　and　on
looking　at　them　more　closely；　after　he　had　been　told　this；　he　found
that　there　could　hardly　be　two　opinions　on　the　subject。　　So　he
caught　up　the　remark　and　reproduced　it　as　his　own；　concluding　that
these　psalms　had　probably　never　been　written　by　David　at　all；　but
had　got　in　among　the　others　by　mistake。

The　essay；　perhaps　on　account　of　the　passage　about　the　Psalms；
created　quite　a　sensation；　and　on　the　whole　was　well　received。
Ernest's　friends　praised　it　more　highly　than　it　deserved；　and　he　was
himself　very　proud　of　it；　but　he　dared　not　show　it　at　Battersby。　　He
knew　also　that　he　was　now　at　the　end　of　his　tether；　this　was　his　one
idea　（I　feel　sure　he　had　caught　more　than　half　of　it　from　other
people）；　and　now　he　had　not　another　thing　left　to　write　about。　　He
found　himself　cursed　with　a　small　reputation　which　seemed　to　him
much　bigger　than　it　was；　and　a　consciousness　that　he　could　never
keep　it　up。　　Before　many　days　were　over　he　felt　his　unfortunate
essay　to　be　a　white　elephant　to　him；　which　he　must　feed　by　hurrying
into　all　sorts　of　frantic　attempts　to　cap　his　triumph；　and；　as　may
be　imagined；　these　attempts　were　failures。

He　did　not　understand　that　if　he　waited　and　listened　and　observed；
another　idea　of　some　kind　would　probably　occur　to　him　some　day；　and
that　the　development　of　this　would　in　its　turn　suggest　still　further
ones。　　He　did　not　yet　know　that　the　very　worst　way　of　getting　hold
of　ideas　is　to　go　hunting　expressly　after　them。　　The　way　to　get　them
is　to　study　something　of　which　one　is　fond；　and　to　note　down
whatever　crosses　one's　mind　in　reference　to　it；　either　during　study
or　relaxation；　in　a　little　note…book　kept　always　in　the　waistcoat
pocket。　　Ernest　has　come　to　know　all　about　this　now；　but　it　took　him
a　long　time　to　find　it　out；　for　this　is　not　the　kind　of　thing　that
is　taught　at　schools　and　universities。

Nor　yet　did　he　know　that　ideas；　no　less　than　the　living　beings　in
whose　minds　they　arise；　must　be　begotten　by　parents　not　very　unlike
themselves；　the　most　original　still　differing　but　slightly　from　the
parents　that　have　given　rise　to　them。　　Life　is　like　a　fugue；
everything　must　grow　out　of　the　subject　and　there　must　be　nothing
new。　　Nor；　again；　did　he　see　how　hard　it　is　to　say　where　one　idea
ends　and　another　begins；　nor　yet　how　closely　this　is　paralleled　in
the　difficulty　of　saying　where　a　life　begins　or　ends；　or　an　action
or　indeed　anything；　there　being　an　unity　in　spite　of　infinite
multitude；　and　an　infinite　multitude　in　spite　of　unity。　　He　thought
that　ideas　came　into　clever　people's　heads　by　a　kind　of　spontaneous
germination；　without　parentage　in　the　thoughts　of　others　or　the
course　of　observation；　for　as　yet　he　believed　in　genius；　of　which　he
well　knew　that　he　had　none；　if　it　was　the　fine　frenzied　thing　he
thought　it　was。

Not　very　long　before　this　he　had　come　of　age；　and　Theobald　had
handed　him　over　his　money；　which　amounted　now　to　5000　pounds；　it　was
invested　to　bring　in　5　pounds　per　cent　and　gave　him　therefore　an
income　of　250　pounds　a　year。　　He　did　not；　however；　realise　t