egoist 42

7/27/2019 Egoist 42

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/egoist-42 1/16

Published Monthly

T H E E G O I S TN o . 2 . — V O L . I V . F E B R U A R Y 1917. S I X P E N C E .

Editor: H A R R I E T S H A W W E A V E R .

Assistant Editors :R I C H A R D A L D I N G T O N .H . D .

Contributing Editor :

D O R A M A R S D E N , B.A.

C O N T E N T SP A G E

O B S E R V A T I O N S P R E L I M I N A R Y T O A D E F I N I T I O N O F

" I M A G I N A R Y . " B y D . Marsden . . . . 1 7 P Y G M A L I O N . B y H . D . 2 1

J A M E S J O Y C E . B y E z r a Po und (with Woodcu t by R o a l dK r i s t i a n ) . . . . . . .21

A U T U M N R A I N . B y D . H . Lawrence . . . . 2 2

T H E E X I L E S . B y Madame C i o l k o w s k a . . . . 2 3 T H E C H I L D . B y May Sinclair . . . . .24

P A G E

T H E F U T U R E O F A M E R I C A N H U M O U R . B y Yone N o g u c h i 2 5

E N V Y . B y F. S. F l i n t 2 6

P A S S I N G P A R I S . B y M. C . . . . . . . 2 6

E Z R A P O U N D . Translated f r o m th e F renc h of Jean de

Bosschère . . . . . . . . 2 7

S E R I A L S T O R Y — T A R R . B y Wy n d h a m Lewis . . 2 9

C O R R E S P O N D E N C E: Dreiser Pro test . . .30

V I . O B S E RVAT I O N S P R E L I M I N A R Y T O A

DEFINITION O F " I M A G I N A RY "

B Y D . M A R S D E N

I

THE difficulties standing in the w ay of a satisfactory definiti on of imaginary very greatlyexceed those presented by the term real,

w h i c h was the subject of our last stu dy. Th e reasonis that the activities w i t h w h i c h the latter is concerned,i .e . whether a name has been rightly or wrongly appliedto a given phenomenon, can be expressed in termsw h i c h are comparatively superficial. The termimaginary, on the contrary, embodies a distinctionbetween v i t a l activities so basic that an adequateco nsiderati on of th em forces a defi niti on of the termlife itself. Th at is, the ontologic al questions w h i c h ,w i t h anything approximating to s k i l l one mightsuccessfully evade in considering real, become theever-present substance of one's care in consideringimaginary. It is perhaps desirable therefore to stateour motive for insinuating a study of imaginarybetween real on the one hand, and its opposite, illu-sory, on the other. Our justif ic ation is, that i n orderto close up c ertain leakages of meaning in the t ermreal i t s e l f i t is necessary to do so. There exists aloosely held but widespread assumption, w h i c hpsyc hologists themselves show no anxiety to undermine and to w h i c h indeed the perfunctory manneri n w h i c h psyc ho logy deals w i t h imagination is directlydue, that the imaginary stands in some sort of antithetical relation to the real.

Y e t that such assump tion is erroneous is easilydemonstrable. There is nothing i n the meaning ofeith er term to render th e one exclusive of the other.O n the contrary, both can be, and are, simultaneouslyapplied to one and the same image : as when we quitecorrectly say of an image, " I t is really imaginary.'"T he two terms do bear a close relation to each other,bu t i t is not one of anti thesis. Th e act ual anti thesiso f real is, as we have already indic ated, the t erm

illusory.(2) The first preliminary to our study then w i l l be

to indic ate precisely wh at the relatio nship betweenimaginary and real is. It w i l l be found that thegrou nd has already been part ly covered i n ou r chaptero n the real. I t w i l l moreover be fu rther covered i nconnexion w i t h illusory. A t th is po int therefore wes h a l l merely have to state the relati onship in it scategoric form. Thought is a special mode of applica-tion of the powers of imagination. When we think, weuse imaginary images in a parti cular way. Theelement w h i c h distinguishes thought-inspired activityas against instincti ve act ivi ty is the imaginativ e one ;and men's mi nds have ri ghtly apprehended the factsof the situ ation when th ey, speaking of the power ofth ou ght in general, usu ally intend that one shallunderstand thereby imagination rather than thoughtas the more characteristic and inclusive term.

(3) The characteristics w h i c h distinguish thoughtand im agination from each other can be reduced inwords to very modest dimensions, tho ugh t hei r issuei n act io n involves all the difference w h i c h lies betweenthe imaginary and the real. F o r thou ght producesthe last and imagination th e first. We w i l l state th edifference thus : I n imagination the imaginary imagecombines w i t h l i k e imaginary images. I n thoughtimaginary images pair, one by one, each w i t h it scorresponding external image. T h i n k i n g is thereforethe interlaci ng of the imaginary w i t h its externalco unterpart (as presumed). If wh en th e latter issubjected to certain standard usages such presumption proves i t se l f justif ied, up on th e ext ernal imageis superimp osed a disti nct iv e label. A s pro duct h a l fof the imaginary and h a l f the external it now constituted a realized image. I n such manner does th eimaginary image intertwining w i t h the external c a l linto existence the w o r l d of reality. A f t e r a l i k emanner also does i t create that of i l l u s i o n .

(4) When we compare external w i t h imaginaryimages, we find many common points of likeness.

B o t h alike are, felt. B o t h show liveliness and strengthand both are equally capable of showing aspects of

7/27/2019 Egoist 42


18 THE EGOIST February 1917

keen pleasure and acute pai n. Judg ed from the pointo f v i e w of seeking an increase of satisfaction alongsidea di min uti on of pai n, however, an outstandingdifference presents i t se l f between them, in thatimaginary images show an orderliness and intelligenceo f sequence in pursuit of these ends w h i c h is constantlyg i v i n g a lead to the external w o r l d . It is the supe

r i o r i t y of the imaginary in this very respect thatgives purpose to the processes of thi nki ng. Thoug htis a bridge w h i c h the hum an species has constr uctedas a means whereby the external order of imagesca n be impregnated w i t h something of the imaginary'spart icula r quali ty in this respect. The real w o r l das the immediate issue of thought is man's ingeniousand unique creation g i v i n g body and form to thisprecise intention, g i v i n g a lead to the external w o r l d .

I I

(5) H a v i n g dealt w i t h the imputed antithesis ofimaginary, our second preliminary w i l l be concerned

w i t h its actu al antithesis. The conception w h i c hopposes and completes that of the imaginary imageis an external one. S o ! A t the ver y threshold ofour inquiry we are confronted w i t h the riddle alikeo f phil osop hy an d science—that of space. Whate verexplanation one may be prepared to give of thiselement of disruption and cleavage operating amongthe totality of life's images, space must alwaysremain the factor from w h i c h the imaginary derivesits significance. No account of ima gin ar y thereforeca n proceed any part of its course without g i v i n gsome account of space also. We sha ll not pre tendto offer here an y deta ile d account of space. Wes h a l l merely hope to be able to indicate on whatlines any such account must travel, the facts of l ifebeing what they are.

(6) Let the vital unit be described as the unit offeeling, the unit of cognition, life, the ego or theuniverse. B y whatever name i t is called, its essentialcharacteristics w i l l in each case be identi cal : it w i l lcomprehend w i t h i n its borders distinction, difference,and d i v i s i o n . Essentially, l i fe is the unit w h i c hcannot be described (because it cannot be experienced)unde r a single aspect. Ta ken throughout its entirerange from the ce l l w h i c h is si mpl y a stomach to thecomplexest type of humanity, the number of elementsunder w h i c h the fact of l i fe is expressible is threefold.

W e can speak of l i fe even as we can experience it,o n l y as a trinity: the trinity of organism, externalworld, and space. We might say that these threerepresent in an unrup tura ble uni on life's two poles,together w i t h the axis w h i c h at once joins and dividest h e m! A n d just as one pole is meaningless save i nrelation to the other and both meaningless save inrelation to a d i v i d i n g and uniting axis, so is anorganism meaningless apart from its world, and bothtogether meaningless apart from space. Hence,whether we elect to say that l i fe is the establis hmento f an org ani sm, or the esta blish ment of space, or thebi r th of the external w o r l d matters nothing. E a c hstatement equally inplicates the remaining two.

E a c h portends the same single but triu ne-fa ced facto f l i fe , of a universe, and of an ego.

L e t us once more trave rse the selfsame fact. Le tus begin by saying that the minimum of l i fe is theestabli shment of a Self. E v e n so, the same l o g i c a lchain pr omp tl y ravels down. Fo r the meaning ofself exists only in relation to another term—thenot-self, while the relation of a self to a not-self canbe postulat ed o nly by postu lati ng also the existenceo f some principle of d i v i s i o n . A n d that brings usback to space again! A l w a y s the same three in oneand one in th ree!

(7) Befo re conside rin g whethe r eve n this t riu neaspect of l i fe exhausts the prime and i n i t i a l postulatesnecessary for the bare statement of l i fe , let us seewhether it is possible to assemble a set of conditions

w h i c h c o u l d illustrate the facts as far as sta ted .C a n we establish a u n i f i e d sy ste m; a self-containeduniverse comprising w i t h i n i tse l f two worlds i n t i -mately combined and yet drastically alien ated; alikeyet opposite ; different yet interacting in mutuallyfitting adjustment one w i t h the othe r? Le t us tr yto construct after the dynamic model a l o g i c a l replicao f such condit ions . Le t us postu late a nodul e ofenergy comprising force in a state of steadily increasingtension. The tension growing, let us say that finallyi t reaches explosion-point; and the explosion effectingi t se l f it has to show as its sequel a disintegration ofthe i n i t i a l force into two streams diffe ring from oneanother as positi ve to negative, equal but oppositean d i n c l i n i n g to opposite poles. Say that eachthread of each stream has its own t w i n poles, andthat the positive poles of all the threads come togetherand meet round about a point, thus rendering the lattera nucleus from w h i c h the threads joining them w i t hthe negative poles strike outwards l i k e r a d i i fromthe centre to the circumference of a sphere. A d d also

that knots form in the outgoing threads, thus producing denser patches in the finer whole, and we canbegin to allocate the rôles.

(8) The cluster of inter commun icati ng posi tivepoles represents the organ ism—the self. The finethreads extending divergently from the centre to allpoints of the univer se are the substance of spacealong w h i c h travel the currents passing betweentheir respective poles and to whose contact w i t h thepositive poles we give the name sensa tion. A t arelatively sma ll distance from the actu al centre, i.e .from the n ucle i of the ne rvous s yste m, there is wovenout of the relatively dense and close-packed threadsan outer l ine of defence—a sy stem of l i m i t e d entrancesand exits—by way of w h i c h as the sense-organs thecurrents pass inw ar d from the negative poles. Theexpanse of space is the di rect measure of the stre ngtho f propulsion existing in the total v i t a l system. Theknot s in the sp ati al substance are the furnish ings ofspace : the objects com pri sin g the e xte rn al w o r l d .L i f e i t se l f is the establishme nt a nd mainte nan ce ofspace and the passage of the positi ve and negativecurrents tr ave lli ng through space between the irrespective poles. Conve rsel y mus t death be theshrinkage to vanishing-point of the threads of space.When " t o dy in g eyes the casement s l o w l y grows aglimmering squar e," the last weak ray s of space are

s w i f t l y shrinking, fading, fainting. Then suddenlythey are no t; and life's br ie f adventure is finished :Organism, W o r l d, Space, and Time alike i n v o l v e d i nthe one common dissolution.

(9) W h ic h brings us to the rôle, in the l o g i c a lscheme of things, w h i c h has been labelled Time. For,once the fact of l i fe has been rendered capable ofl o g i c a l manipulation (if we may use such a conjunctiono f term) by the postulating of a self, a w o r l d , andspace, it becomes evident that this threefold renderingb y no means exhausts the whole of life 's pr imeaspects. It becomes clear that l i fe is not merely atriune but a multi-f eature d fa ct; so tha t when oneo f its forms (to w i t : man) is tak en w i t h a desire to

paraphrase it by means of verbal symbols, thesesame symbols w i l l run to a lengthy l i s t before theyhave taken account of even its most essential features.A c c o r d i n g l y, the rôle of Time equally w i t h those ofspace and the w o r l d is inherent in the account alreadygiven wherein we paraphr ased the life 's beginnings.If, for instance, the pre-vital condition be one oftension between forces, the one of w h i c h has to securea preponde rance of streng th before the v i t a l conditionca n establish itself, the system when so establishedw i l l s t i l l retain w i t h i n itself, in, ad di ti on to forces ofa v i t a l tendency, those forces w h i c h were anti-vital.L i f e indeed w i l l represent merely the domination ofthese lat ter forces by the former. Th at is, whi le the.latter are dominated so long as l i fe maintains itself,they are not annihilated. A c c o r d i n g l y, throughout

7/27/2019 Egoist 42


February 1917 THE EGOIST 19

the period of existence of every v i t a l system, certainforces w i l l remain w i t h i n i t i n i m i c a l to its preservat ion an d maintenan ce. Not al l currents thereforew h i c h travel between pole and pole can be equallyv i t a l l y welcome; consequently the characteristicw h i c h we c a l l preference w i l l h o l d a prime place inever y sys tem. It is thi s fact of preference w h i c h

constitutes the all-important v i t a l attitude of affirmation an d negation: the sense of Is and Is-not w h i c hattends in the nicest di scri minati on upon a ll things.T he same fact, too, yiel ds the att itu de of desire an drepulsion: satisfaction an d frustration ; al l of themprimary basic v i t a l attitudes. As for ti me : vitaltime must be the sustentation of effort: the actualy i e l d i n g of the t o l l l e v i e d upo n a system's strengthto the end tha t the forces w i t h i n it making for itsmaintenance shall prevail against those w h i c h arewarring against it. Thus time is the small changeinto w h i c h the v i t a l strength of the system convertsitself, and the form in w h i c h from its advent to itsclose it spends and exhausts i t s e l f upon its preferences.

(10) The most obvi ous objec tio n to an y suchparaphrase of the facts of l ife as the one just givenis tha t it makes space and time into mere items oradjuncts of the i n d i v i d u a l v i t a l system : beginni ngw i t h it and ending w i t h it. This objection, givenforce to as i t is on the one ha nd by cons ider ati onof the i l l i m i t a b l e and abiding-seeming character ofthe spatial "universe," and on the other by theunending tale of the world's history, in time lookssufficiently overwhelming. To our understanding,however, it seems that in a complete statement ofa theory on these lines these objections, while serious,ca n be shown to stop just short of total overwhelming-ness. A n d at this poi nt we must leave the subjectfo r the time being.

I I I

(11) The first im por tan t cor oll ary to s uch a concept ion of space is that it forces an immediate overhaulingof the dualism w i t h w h i c h Descartes handicappedmodern philosophy at its inception, and w h i c h haspreyed upon its strength from that day to this . Theessential oneness in difference of the cognitionalactivity i n v o l v i n g as it does both "poles" (positiveand negative, subjective or objective, just as wechoose to name them), lays a ban upon a d i v i s i o ninto a "mind-stuff" w h i c h cognizes on the one handan d a "s t u f f " of a different k i n d w h i c h is cognizedon the other. Descar tes' first post ulat e of a rescogitans versus a res extensa is left without any l o g i c a lbase, an d presents i t s e l f as a distortion of all that ischaracteristic of l ife as the unit of cognition andfeeling. Th e attempt to set the "content" ofcognition over against a cognit ive " a c t i v i t y "abstracted by some asserted means from cognitionas a whole, can hope for as much success as an analogous attempt to outline the course of an express trainb y constructing a stone w a l l across the railway-track.Such d i v i s i o n , however, has obtained what practicallywe may c a l l univ ersal acceptance. The fact that i thas accounts for the paral ysed cond iti on in w h i c h

philosophy finds i t s e l f and for the open and—shallwe say—shameless confession of impoten ce w h i c hphilosophy's most earnest and strenuous servantsfind themselves drive n to make. We have alre adyquoted Spencer's opinion that this dualism—whosegenuineness he accepts as wholeheartedly as anytranscendentalist—is one "n ev er to be transcend edw h i l e consciousness las ts ." A wri ter of l i k e mentalcomplexion, D r . Ty n d a l l , s a y s : " T h e passage fromthe physics of the brain to the corresponding factsof consciousness is unt hin kab le. Gra nte d that adefinite though t an d a definite molecular acti on i nthe brain occur simultaneously, we do not possess theintellectual organ w h i c h w o u l d enable us to pass

b y a process of reaso ning from the one to the other.They appear together, but we do not know wh y. "

A n d H u x l e y says, " I know nothing whatever, andnever hope to know anything, of the steps by w h i c hthe passage from molecular movement to states ofconsciousness is effected."

(12) A m o n g their very many differences and disagreements i n creed and temperament, the one counton w h i c h idealist and (latter -day) materialist opinion

are at one is that the phenomena of thought andmatter present nowhere a mutual point of contact.B o t h schools h o l d tha t the two sets of phenomenar un parallel courses and , because para llel , they rema info r ever apart. A difference in manners perhaps :a deeper estimation of the value of suavity mayinspire idealist opi nion to garb i t s e l f in a more soothingraiment, and it might say that though the antithesisof thought and matter is a positive and indeedsupreme fact, nature w o u l d not be so unkind as toleave us w ith out a reco ncili ng prin cipl e somewhere ;that in fact there is a reconciling principle but thatits plac e of residence is unf ort unat ely outsid e theboundaries of Time and Space. W h i c h is not much

use to people whose interests al l li e within Time andSpace !

(13) O b v i o u s l y this dualism w h i c h modern p h i l o -sophy has maintained from first to last is a matter inw h i c h the imaginary has a paramou nt concern. Sincewe have claimed that imagination is the element ofa l l that is essential in thought, we must be preparedto make the imaginary responsible for all that hasrendered thought as contrasted w i t h matter a mystery.F o r us this dualism w h i c h we h o l d is not impossibleof resolution w i l l have to be described as that ofimagination versus matter, rather than that of thought(or mind) versus matter.

(14) While the working-out of the details of ourposition must be postponed u n t i l we have dealt w i t himaginary itself, we can here state a number ofconclusions w h i c h w i l l show what direction ourargu ment is ta ki ng . In the first place, i n accordancew i t h the theory of space just outlined, we maintainthat cogni zed images cannot be oppose d to somecognizing act ivi ty w h i c h "ac hi eve s" them. Thereis nothing in experience to correspond w i t h a rescogitans and a res extensa. C o g n i t i o n , feeling, l i fe ,reduc ed to its ver y simples t element, const itut es aunity comprehend ing bot h aspects. Abs tr act fromi t either, and there remain s—not hing! The spatialpole (if we may so describe it) is not one whit less

i n v o l v e d in any single cognit ion th an the organicpole, and vice versa. The current of movement w h i c heffects its course between the two achieves one single,unbro ken, compound , cognit ive fact. Tha t compou nd creat ion we kno w under t he d escript ion ofthi ngs : of objects o ccu pyi ng space. Matter, that isthinghood, is the activity of both self and not-selfacting as a whole.

(15) It is to be noted how persistently philosophydirects a b l i n d eye upon this elementary fact ofcognition. That every spatial fact is just as mucha state of consciousness as is any inner or mentalfact is always ignored in practice in spite of the lip-service w h i c h is pa id to it in theory. Philoso phers

speak of "the passage from molecular movement tostates of consciousness," as though it were possibleto conceive of them as something other than statesof consciousness. Ye t molecul ar movement has asmuch c l a i m to be regarded as just such a consciousstate as a state of bliss or of agony or any k i n d offeeling whatsoever. In this respect there is nodistinction to be drawn between the most ultimateray of the remotest star or the instrument w h i c hfixes i t , and the glow of exultation f o l l o w i n g uponthe ray's discovery. A l l are states of consciousnessequally. So too are the little shapes called figuresunder w h i c h the changes observed in a muscle aresubsumed as quantities, together w i t h the muscle

itself, w i t h th e scalpel and the forceps and all themultitudinous images w h i c h constitute the physical.

7/27/2019 Egoist 42


20 THE EGOIST F e b r u a r y 1917

history of matter. In short, it is not possible topass from anything whatsoever to a state of consciousness, simp ly because ever yth ing whatsoever is astate of consciousness.

(16) Where then are we to look for the source ofconfusion? That such a source exists is p l a i n . Th eantithesis of mind versus matter w o u l d not have

been so re ad il y acc ept ed unless it possessed someth in g more th an a mere show of speciousness. Thi sis our t he or y: the mista ken distincti ons as betweena res cogitans and a res extensa has been inspired bythe dis tin cti on genuinely obtai ning between twoorders of cog nit ion , i.e. tha t between cognition an drecognition. That we are in possession of the rightclue in holding t h a t the duali stic dist incti on has todo w i t h a new form of cognitional act ivi ty w h i c hcontrasts w i t h the more elementary form of cogni tio nis supported at the outset by the fact that philosophyaccepts wit ho ut demur al l the facts of cogni tio n.Otherwise how account for the easy, not to say g l ibw ay i n w h i c h philosophers refer to the facts of physics:

a l l of them cogniti ve facts. It is an act ivi ty w h i c his l i k e and yet unlike cognition w h i c h introducesuneasiness. It is the act ivi ty w h i c h supplementscognition w h i c h presents the stumbling-block. Thatac t iv i ty is recognition: the act ivi ty w h i c h has becomepos sibl e because ma n has dis cover ed the way tocreate imag in ar y images. In the slow evol utio n ofl i f e ' s forms the imaginary image has supervened uponthe cognitional w o r l d , and l ife has found i t s e l f impregnated w i t h a new power. It is this newly acquir edpower w h i c h as thought an d mind has baffled men'sunde rst andi ng from the beginnin g of his his tory .This revolutionary development in w h i c h cognitionalact ivi ty is supplemented by an ac ti vi ty higher and

more complex than i t s e l f but not basically differentfrom it, made its appearance in creation w i t h theadve nt of man. The inst rument by w h i c h it effecteditself, and by w h i c h i t s t i l l develops from strengthto strength, is tha t of S P E E C H . B y means of speechman has effected among his k i n d — i n a k i n d of loop-line extension at cognition's positive pole—a prolongat ion of the current w h i c h in instinctive activityeventuates i n an immedia te and fort hrigh t responsewhenever the latter is stimulated by a current runninginward from the spa ti al pole. It is in the mechanismof this "p a u s e " : rather in this extension of thecurrent 's circuit, tha t the substance of our the oryof th e imaginary is to be sought.

I V

(17) Th e foregoi ng secti on summari zed amounts toth is : On grounds w h i c h we propose soon to develop,we conclude that the supposed antithesis of matteran d min d is act ual ly reducible to what amounts tono more th an a mere dis ti nct io n between two formsof cognition : cognition proper an d recognition. Thesetwo act ivi tie s can be represented b y thei r dis tinc tiveproducts as those producti ve characteristically of thew o r l d of external objects and the w o r l d of imaginat i o n . B o t h these worlds meet and combine to maketh e w o r l d of th ou gh t; while going back to the or ig in

of the entire d is ti nct io n again we have to say thatthe development of recognition out of its elementalform cognition was made pos sible i n man becausew i t h him began the era of Speech. In short, life'sdualism is a mistake w h i c h can be explained whilei t cannot be defended.

(18) T hi s side of the subject we now leave to dea lw i t h another subject quite different from dualismi n t r i n s i c a l l y, but one w h i c h in its application hasbecome closely impli cat ed in dualis m's defence. Werefer to the present ment of the the ory of psych ophysical parallelism w h i c h has latterly secured adominant position as that w h i c h explains mostaccepta bly the theory of dualis m. In our opinio n

the enormities of the explanation exceed even thoseof the theory w h i c h it seeks to expla in, inasmuch as

i t misconstrues the entire function of science andthe whole meaning of knowledge. The the ory mai ntains tha t while no state of consciousness ever t akesplace without concomitant changes in the neuralsystem, yet is there no causal connexion betweenthe two. The neural changes run th eir course concomitant w i t h , an d correla ted to the changes i nconsciousness, but neither course ever overflows thel i m i t s of its own self-contained sys tem so as toestablish direct connexion w i t h the other. Thepassage from Professor James w h i c h we quote beloww i l l describe the posi tio n : tho ugh it sho uld be not edtha t of parallelists there are two var iet ies : one mightsay a higher and a lower accordingly as each holdsthat the one or the oth er of the se lf-co ntai ned syst emsis the dominant one.

" I f we knew thoroughly the nervous system ofShakespeare, a nd as thoroug hly all his env ir on in gconditions . . . we should be able . . . to show whyhi s hand came to trace on certain sheets of paper thosecrabbed little black marks w h i c h we for shortnes s'

sake ca l l the manuscript of Hamle t. We shouldunderstand the rationale of every erasure and alteration therein, and we shoul d under sta nd al l thi swithout in the slightest degree acknowledging theexistence of the thought s i n Shakespea re's mi nd . . . .O n the other ha nd, not hing in all this c o u l d preventus from g i v i n g an equally complete account of . . .Shakespeare's sp iri tua l his tor y, an acco unt i n w h i c hevery gleam of thought and emotion should find i tsplace. The mind-hi sto ry w o u l d run alongside of thebody-history of each man, and each point in theone w o u l d correspond to, but not react upon, a pointin the other. So the melo dy floats from the ha rp-strings, but neither checks nor quickens its v i b r a -ti on s; so the shadow runs alongside the pedest rian ,but in no way influences his steps."

(19) Now what k i n d of reason is offered in defenceof the b o l d assertion that phenomena, presentingthemselves in such unv ar yi ng inte rconn exio n as thetheory of parallelism says neural and conscious processes do, stand in no sort of causal connexion theone w i t h the oth er? We w i l l let its advoca tes speakfo r themselves. Professor Stout (who w o u l d beclassified as of the "h ig he r persuasion) puts th ereason expressly in the passage in the subjoinedquotation w h i c h we have marke d by it ali cs :

" W h e n we come to the direct connexion betweena nervous process and a correlated conscious process,we find a complete soluti on of con ti nui ty. The twoprocesses have no common factor. The ir conn exi onlies entire ly outside of our tot al knowledge of ph ys ic alnature on the one hand, and of conscious process onthe other. The laws w h i c h govern the change ofposition of bodies and of the ir component ato msand molecules in space, evidently have nothing todo w i t h the relation between a material occurrenceand a conscious occurrence.

"No reason in the world can be assigned why thechange produced in the grey pulpy substance of thecortex by light of a certain wave-length should be accompanied by the sensation red, and why that produced by

light of a different wave-length should be accompaniedby the sensation green. It is equally unintelligible thata state of volition should be followed by a change in thesubstance of the cortex and so immediately by thecontraction of a muscle."

T he writer is here unmistakably arguing t h a tnotwithstanding the strict correlation and concomitance exi st in g between the two processes, sciencemust s t i l l further supply a satisfying answer to oneparticular why or be accounted incapable of establishing causal connexi on between them. No w let usnote minutely what k i n d of query this why represents.What the passage demands to know is why light of acerta in wave-length shoul d be acco mpanied by th e

(Continued on page 31)

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



PYGMALION

B Y H . D .

I

S H A L LI let m y s e l f be caught

i n my own light,s h a l l I let m y s e l f be broken

i n my own heat,or s h a l l I cleft the rock as of oldan d break my own firew i t h its surface?

Does this fire thwart mean d my work,or my work—does it c l o u d this l igh t ;w h i c h is the god,w h i c h the stonethe god takes for his use?

I IW h i c h am I,the stone or the powerthat l if ts the rock from the earth?A m I the master of this fire,Is this fire my own strength?

A m I the master of thiss w i r l upon s w i r l of light—have I made it as in old timesI made the gods from the rock?

Have I made this fire from myself,or is this arrogance—is this fire a godtha t seeks me i n the dark?

I I I

I made image upon image for my use,I made image upon image for the graceof Pallas was my flintan d my help was Hephaestos.

I made god upon godstep from the c o l d rock,

I made the gods less than menfor I was a man and they my work.

A n d now what is it that has come to passfor fire has shaken my hand,my strivi ngs are dust.

I V

N o w what is it that has come to pass?Over my head, fire stands,my marbles are alert.

E a c h of the gods, perfect,cries out from a perfect throat :you are useless,no marble can bind me,no stone suggest.

V

They have melted into the lightand I am desolate,they have meltedeach from his p l i n t h ,each one departs.

They have gone,what agony can express my grief?

E a c h from his marble basehas stepped into the lightan d my work is for naught.

V I

N o w am I the powerthat has made this fireas of ol d I made the godsstart from the rocks—am I the godor does this fire carve mefor its use?

JAMES JOYCE

A T L A S T T H E N O V E L A P P E A R S *

IT is u n l i k e l y that I s h a l l say a nyt hi ng new aboutM r . Joyce's

n o v e l ,A Portrait of the Artist as a

Young Man. I ha ve alre ady stated that it isa book worth reading and that it is written in goodprose. In usi ng these terms I do not employ thelooseness of the half-crown reviewer.

I am very glad that it is now possible for a fewhundred people to read M r. Joyc e comfortably froma bound book, instead of from a much-handled file ofE G O I S T S or from a slippery bundle of type-script.A f t e r much diff icul ty T H E E G O I S T i t s e l f turns publisheran d produces A Portrait of the Artist as a volume, forthe hatred of ordin ary E n g l i s h publi shers for good prosei s , l i k e the hatred of the Quarterly Review for goodpoetry, deep-rooted, traditional.

Since Landor's Imaginary Conversations were bandied from p i l l a r to post, I doubt if any man usc ri pthas met w i t h so much oppositi on, and no ma nuscri pthas been more worth supporting.

Landor is s t i l l an unpopul ar author. He is s t i l la terror to fools. He is s t i l l concealed from theyoung (not for any alleged indecency, but s i m p l ybecause he did not acquiesce in certain popular fo l l ies) .H e , Landor, s t i l l plays an inconspicuous rôle inuniversity courses. The amoun t of light w h i c h hew o u l d shed on the undergraduate m i n d w o u l d makestudents inc onven ien t to the average run of professors.B u t La nd or is permanent.

Members of the " F l y - F i s h e r s " and " R o y a l A u tom o b i l e " clubs, and of the "Isthmian," may not readh i m . They w i l l not read Mr . Joyce . E pur simuove. Despite the printers and publishers theB r i t i s h Government has recognized Mr. Joyce'sliterary merit. Th at is a definite gain for the p art yof inte lli gence. A number of qua l i f i ed judges haveacquiesced i n my state ment of two years ago, thatM r . Joy ce was an excellent and impo rta nt wri ter ofprose.

The last few years have seen the gradual shapingof a part y of intelli gence, a part y not bou nd by anycentral doctri ne or theory. We cannot accuratelydefine new writers by applying to the m t ag-namesfrom ol d author s, b ut as there is no adequate meansof conv eyi ng the general impression of thei r characteristics one may at t imes employ such termi nology,carefully stating that the terms are nothing morethan approximation.

W i t h that qualification, I w o u l d say that JamesJoyce produces the nearest thing to Flaubertian prosethat we have now in E n g l i s h , just as Wyndham L e w i shas written a novel w h i c h is more l i k e , and more fitlycompared w i t h , Dost oi evs ky th an is the wor k of anyof his contemporaries. I n l i k e manner M r. T. S.E l i o t comes nearer to filling the place of Jules L aForgue in our generation. ( D o i n g the "nearest

*

A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, by James Joyce.T H E E G O I S T L T D . Re ad y now, price 6s.

7/27/2019 Egoist 42


2 2

THE EGOIST February 1917

t h i n g " need not i m p l y an appr oach to a standard ,from a position inferior.)

T w o of these writers have met w i t h all sorts ofopposi t ion. I f Mr. E l i o t probably has not yetencounter ed ver y muc h opposition, it is only becausehis work is not yet very w i d e l y known.

M y own income was considerably docked becauseI dared to say t h a t Gaudi er-B rze ska was a good

sculptor and tha t Wy n d h a m L e w i s was a great masterof desig n. It has, however, reached an almost irreducible mi ni mu m, and I am, perhaps, f a i r l y safe i nreasserting Joyce's a b i l i t y as a writ er. It w i l l costme no more t ha n a few vio len t att acks f rom severalshelter ed, an d therefore courageous, anonymi tie s.

J A M E S J O Y C E By R O A L D K R I S T I A N

When you t e l l the Irish that they are slow in recogn i z i n g their own men of genius they reply w i t hstreet riots and p o l i t i c s .

N o w , despite the jobb ing of bigots and of thei rsectarian p ubli shin g nouses, and despite the " F l y -F i s h e r s " and the types w h i c h they represent, an ddespite the unwil lingn ess of the print -packers (a word

derived from pork-packers) and the i n i t i a l objectionsof th e D u b l i n publishers an d the lat er unwillingness ofth e E n g l i s h publishers, Mr. Joyce's novel appears i nbook form, and intelligent readers gathering few byfew w i l l read it, and it w i l l remain a permanent part ofE n g l i s h lite ratur e—writt en by an Irish man i n Triestean d first publ ish ed in Ne w Yo r k C i t y . I doubt if acomparison of Mr . Joyc e to other E n g l i s h writers orIrish writers w o u l d mu ch help to define hi m . Onecan only say tha t he is rather unlike them. ThePortrait is very differ ent from L' Education Sentimen-tale, but it w o u l d be easier to compare it w i t h thatnovel of Flaubert 's than w i t h anyt hin g else. Flau bertpointed out tha t if France had studied his work theym ig ht have been saved a good deal in 1870. If morepeople had read The Portrait and certain stories inM r . Joyce's Dubliners there might have been lessrecent t roubl e in Ire lan d. A clear diagnosis is neverwithout its value.

Apar t from M r . Joyc e's realism —the school-life,th e l i fe in the Univ ersi ty, the f a m i l y dinner w i t hthe discussion of Parne ll depicted in his novel —apar t from, or of a piece w i t h , al l thi s is the style,the actual w r i t i n g : hard, clear-cut, w i t h no wasteof word s, no bun dl in g up of useless phrases, no fillingi n w i t h pages of slosh.

It is very important tha t there should be clear,

unexaggerated, realisti c literatur e. It is very import an t tha t there sho uld be good prose. The h e l l of

contemporary Europe is caused by the lack of representative government in Germ any, and by the nonexistence of decent prose in the G erm an language .C l e a r thought and sanity depend on clear prose.They cannot l i v e apart. The form er produces thelatter. The latter conserves and transmi ts theformer.

Th e mush of the German sentence, the straddling

of the verb out to the end, are just as much a part ofthe befoozlement of K u l t u r and the consequent h e l l ,as was the rhet oric of late r Ro me the seed an d thesympt om of the Ro ma n Em pir e's decadence andextinction. A nation tha t cannot write clearlycannot be trusted to govern, nor yet to think.

Germ any has ha d two decent prose-write rs,Frederick the Great and Heine—the one taught byVo l t a i r e , and the other saturated w i t h French andw i t h Paris. O n l y a nation accustomed to muzzyw r i t i n g c o u l d have been led by the nose and bamboozled as the Germans have been by their controllers.

The terror of clar it y is not confined to any onepeople. The obstruct ioni st an d the p r o v i n c i a l areeverywhere, and in them alone is the perm anen tdanger to c i v i l i z a t i o n . Clear , ha rd prose is the safeguard and should be val ued as such. The m i ndaccustomed to it w i l l not be cheated or stampededby national phrases and public emotionalities.

These facts are true, even for the detesters ofliterature. For those who love good w r i t i n g thereis no need of argum ent. I n the present instance it isenough to say to those who w i l l believe one tha tM r . Joyce's book is now procurable.

E Z R A P O U N D

A U T U M N RAIN

TH E plane leavesF a l l black and wetO n the lawn :

The cloud-sheavesIn heaven's fields yetDroop, and are strewn

In f a l l i ng seeds of rain,The seed of heavenOver my face

F a l l i n g : I hear againL i k e echoes evenThat softly pace

Heaven's muffled floor,The winds that treadOut al l the gr ain

O f tears, th e storeO f harvest breadF r o m the sheaves of gain

Caught up aloft,Th e sheaves of deadM e n and their pain

N o w winnowed soft

F r o m the floor of heaven,Manna i n v i s i b l e

O f all their painF r o m th e floor of heavenF i n e l y d i v i s i b l e

F a l l i n g as rain.

D . H . L A W R E N C E

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



T H E E X I L E S *

IT seems impos sibl e that this war shou ld havespared a breath of l ife in what lingered herea n d there of realism in art: that realism to

w h i c h al l representation is legiti mate but w h i c h everf a l l s short of reality.

T he significance of tragedy has already undergone ametamorphosis. The tragi c situati ons of our modernromantic and naturalistic schools were drawn fromsources some of w h i c h have immutable values, otherso f w h i c h are of rel ative and transi ent value. Theseare already on the shelf w i t h a number of sentimentsa n d sentime ntalitie s we can afford to accommod ateno longer. The circums tances of war cannot subtractfrom the pathos of Dombey and Son or Tess or Jude;i t does not compete w i t h B a l z a c . Not even Zola'sdivulgences are extinguished. E a c h continues in itspeculiar sphere of dr ama. B u t the autho r to comefinds h i m s e l f faced by a w o r l d of unpreced ented eventsw h i c h he cannot ignore if he persist in realistic

evocations.T he t r i v i a l i t i e s , offered to the public as a derivative

from the war, are in dic ativ e of a vague, subconsciousawakening even among the vulgarest to the impossib i l i t y of measuring it w i t h commo n sense. F o r nocommon sense can measure the war. F a i l i n g a higheri d e a l , the purveyors of the public's recreations supplyi t w i t h diversions mak in g no appeal whatever to thereason. Thus may one br ie f ly exp lai n the detestablefutilities indulged in by all the belligerent countries'capitals and bigger agglomerations during c i r c u mstances w h i c h c a l l at the ve ry leas t for flagellation,sackcloth, and ashes if any ever di d. Thus may oneexcuse the antics entirely novel and most wonderfullyunseasonable pe culi ar to the former c api tal ofPuritania.

T he poets alone have a free field before them. Fo rthey, having their own code, may, l i k e Kabalists.translate a ll themes. The prose-writers, the playwrights, w i l l be constrained to make a review of theirstock of subjects, pr oblems and plots. The realtragedies, borne in the souls (and bodies) of themajority, are too bleeding and sore; they are l i k esome of those unhappy wounded who, bandaged allover, do not present a pat ch of immune flesh by w h i c hone dare touch them : o n l y the minor tragedies w i l lbear handling—therefore they won't deserve to be

handled. A min or tragedy being no tragedy. E v e r ything dwindles before the enormous facts defyingcomment and for w h i c h alone alleg ory has the necessary capaciousness. Pr ob abl y a great upheav al, someviolent transformation such as the one we areexperiencing, provoked the Odyssey and Iliad.

M o s t certainly an A r n o l d Bennett or P a u l Bourgetw i l l (or ought to) have l i t t l e to say i n future, thoughfa r be it from me to disparage their efforts hitherto,c r i t i c i s m of w h i c h shoul d take int o account theperiod for w h i c h , and in w h i c h , they wrote. Subsequent to this war there w i l l , or should be, no roomfo r a h y b r i d form of art combi ning imagi nation andrealism. Between purely creative art and f a i t h f u lrecords of facts I can see no occasion for compromise.T o the former category alone genius can make answer.I n the latter the war w i l l leave a vast bibliographyw h i c h for sensation and emotions w i l l eclipse all thenovels and probl em-plays any Wed ek in d or Shawi n the w o r l d can write.

It happens that these solil oquies were ani mate d b ya record of the k i n d : Au Sortir des Camps allemands;Soldats internés en Suisse, by Noëlle Roger . Thewriter, apparently a nurse tending the "e xc han ge d"French prisoners who are recuperating in the A l p s ,relates what she has seen as these things should bet o l d : w i th as l i t t l e comment as description w i l l a l l o w

* Au Sortir des Camps allemands ; Soldats internés en Suisse,par Noëlle Roger ( E d i t i o n A t a r , Genève).

a n d wi thou t any fear of over load ing her obs ervations .Have you ever been shown a photograph of a prisoners'camp, for instance, without minutely examining thetiniest detail from the express ion on the men's facesto the time by the c l o c k on the shelf? F o r what canbe indifferent where a new w o r l d is concerned—anew species of men bred by new conditions, newsensations, new privations, new sufferings, new joys

even?Mme. Noëlle Roger appears to have l i v e d in close

contact w i t h the French and E n g l i s h invalids whohave been sent from the German camps to Switzerland from the mome nt of thei r crossing the frontier .A f t e r such reminiscences as hers, what " f i c t i o n "ca n make us weep, what psychological c o n f l i c tdeserves exam in atio n? A story that w i l l cause youto smile twic e is a good st or y; a narrat ive w h i c hca n on two successive readings draw tears is unsurpassed in pat hos : such a one as this, for example :

T he E n g l i s h came last. Château d' Oex . . . had been

selected for them.

" T h e E n g l i s h . . . we saw them at Constance [where the finalmedical r e v i s i o n is made and pris oners not consi dered il l enough

fo r sojourn in Switzer land are sent back to their camps]. The y

are in even worse state than us."

T he first convoy comprised 304 men, thirty of whom were

officers. When they crossed the frontier, they too, l i k e the

French on the previous day and the preceding ones, saw, on the

extremest point of Swiss s o i l , facing the German sentry, l i t t l egroups of children waving flags and throwing flowers, and a

c r o w d l i n e d all along the r a i l w a y - l i n e cheering the passing

train.

A t Z u r i c h the enthusi asm was bey ond words. The police were

overwhelmed. The crowds had to be a l l o w e d into the stations.

A t Berne refreshments were handed to the "T om mi es ." The n

they continued on their triumphant way. When at six o'cloc k

i n the mor nin g they arr ive d at Montr eu x, the roofs, the terraces

were black w i t h a cheering, weeping, laughing multitu de.

T he tr ain stopped. The notes of the B r i t i s h N a t i o n a l Anthem,

the same as the S w i s s , resounde d. A n d the soldiers in the

carriages and the c r o w d on the quays sang it together.

W e saw these t a l l , thin f e l l o w s , w i t h their h o l l o w cheeks and

drawn features, t r i m in their k h a k i uniforms or black prisoners'

garbs, alight. The y had put so man y flowers i n thei r caps thatthey seemed wreathed w i t h roses. T h e i r procession was at

once superb and p iti able : all those l o n g , damaged bodies,

those l i m p and lame, paralysed, twisted, shortened legs w h i c hthey seemed to carry before them l i k e something cumbersome,

a l l the c r i p p l e d N . C . O . ' s ! Others were carr ied by on stretchersa n d so covered w i t h flowers that their uniforms were completely

hidden. O n l y the pale, s m i l i n g face was v i s i b l e .

T he writer describes the a r r i v a l i n the hotels, theassigning of clean , steam-heated rooms and bedsw i t h sheets on them, to men who had not knowncomfort or p ri vac y for months, their emotion atthe sight of these luxuries added to the effusions ofthe receptions—always spoilt by the haunting v i s i o no f the comrades left behind and those, especially,who at Constance saw the gates closed on the m. . . .

She alludes to the touching idea of the German-Swiss peasants who received their F ren ch and E n g l i s hvisitors sil entl y at first, for, not kn ow in g any othertongue, they feared that the sound of their Teutonicdialect w o u l d not be agreeable to them.

W ho said things w o u l d f a l l back into their oldplaces?

M U R I E L C I O L K O W S K A

Peasant Pottery Shop41 Devonshire Street, Theobald's Road, W.C.

(Close to Southampton Row)

Interesting British and Continental: Peasant Pottery on saleBrightly coloured plaited felt Rugs

7/27/2019 Egoist 42


2 4 THE EGOIST February 1917

T H E C H I L D

I . V I S I O N A R Y

iF R O Mthe Ferry in the east to the Fe rr y in the

west,

T h e river and the grey esplanade,A n d th e high white palisadeG o on and on and on, three abreast.D o w n our lane,T o the end of the esplanade and back again,Is as far as you can walk when you're four,L i k e me.Doors al l along in the palisade,Doors that open and shut without handles or latches

o r anyt hi ng else you can see;I must count every one,U p to seven ; I mustn't miss one;Because I'm afraidO f the seventh door.(I don't know why:Yo u ' r e l i k e that when you're four.)Whi te clouds going up from the river, and blue sky

a n d the sun;Something w i l d in the air,Something strange in the sky;I saw God thereI n the clouds and the sky and the sun.

i i

I saw him w i t h great joy and without any awe(Whatever that i s ) ;A strange, new b l i s s ,

Utte r ly candid, pure from the t aint of sin.Y e t I hid it aw ay;I hid it as if it were sin,U n t i l one dayI let it out when I ought to have kept it in.There must be something oddAbout seeing God;F o r theyG o worrying, worrying, worrying all the wayT o make me confess that I saw what They think I saw.A n d it comes to this,That I set my s m a l l face hard, as who s h a l l say :I ' m sorry. But that's what I saw;I no d

M y head w i t h an obstinate glee;I g r i nW i t h joy that isn't utterly pure from s i n ;A n d at last I say:" D o n ' t you w i s h you were me,T o be able to seeG o d ? "

i i i

They are t e l l i n g me now they w i l l have to put me tob e d ,

N o t for anything specially wrong I've done,B u t for going on saying the naught y th in g I' ve said.W e l l — I don't careI f they do put me to bed.

I f I am more tiresome to-day than ever I've been,I f the y don' t kno w what I mean,I f nobody has ever seen—I f they have put me to bed,I f they have turned out the light,I f I am afraid of what conies and stands by your bed

at night.I don't care.I know that I saw God thereI n the sky and the clouds and the sun.

I I . P R I S O N - H O U S ET H E Y say

G o d hides somewhere

H i g h up, ever so high,A b o v e the clouds and the sun;N o use at al l to t ryA n d see God up there.N o one has ever seen him w i t h his long white beard

a n d his hair,A n d that funny thing the angels make him wearA l l undone.B u t if heaven is God's chair,A n d earth the l i t t l e stool he k i c k s away,A n d the sk y' s al l stuck between,W h y hasn't somebody seenGod's feet coming through?Sharp white feet tearing the blue.A n d there's another thing always puzzles me :They sayThere are three up thereThere's God—that's one ;

A n d , Jesus, his l i t t l e son ;That's two;A n d the H o l y Ghost and the dove co min g down from

heaven:I f you count the dove, that's moreThan three, that's four.W h y —That must be what they meanB y the Three and One.Three and one does make four.(These are the things that bothered me when I was

seven.)

What do you say about somebody having seenG o d once, up in the sky?O h no, it couldn't have been.

We l l — i f I did—it was ever so long ago.I was o n l y four, you know.

I I I . F R I G H TF R I G H T .I have been naughty to-day.M y mother sits in her chair,W i t h the dark of the room and the lightO f the fire on her face and hair.H e r head is turned away,A n d she w i l l not sayG o o d night.I kneel at her kne es; I tryT o touch her face ; I throwM y body in torment down at her feet and cryQ u i e t l y there in my fright.F o r I think, perhaps, perhaps she w i l l die in the

night,A n d never knowH o w sorry I am.Surely, surely she w i l l not let me goOut. of her sight,L i k e this,Without a word or a kiss?I was her l i t t l e lambYesterday.I c l i m b the last stairWhere the gas burns always low ;I n the big dark room my bedStands very s m a l l and white—God—God—are You there?I feel w i t h my hands as I g o ;T h e f loorCries out under my tread;Somebody shuts the door;Somebody turns out the lightA t the head of the stair;A n d I knowThat Go d isn't anywhere,A n d that Mother w i l l die in the night.

M A Y S I N C L A I R

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



T H E F U T U R E OF A M E R I C A N H U M O U R

IT w o u l d be an in te res t ing psyc ho lo gic a l s tu dy tot race bac k ho w the so-ca l l ed A m e r i c a n h u m o u rh a p p e n e d t o b l o o m i n t h e g r i m , c o l d g r o u n d

o f t h e P u r i t a n m i n d . In the ear ly days in A m e r i c a ,w h e n people had to s t ruggle aga ins t the ever-combat i ve Nat ur e an d Indian s , to be opt im is t ic , o r a tleas t to pre te nd to be opt im is t i c , was cons idered apar t mo st courageous , and the p l ay of hu m ou r wasc e r t a i n l y the bes t and most sens ib le se l f -pro tec t ionf r o m m or al degenera t ion . B u t i f we can say t h a tthe rea l t rou ble w i t h the present A m er ic ans l ies inn o t h i n g b u t t h e i r o p t i m i s m , n o u r i s h e d b y t h e i rh a s t y b e l i e f in hu m an i t y and care less ly endorseda n d encouraged by the i r newspapers , we w i l l h a v eno hesitat ion to say t h a t t h e A m e r i c a n h u m o u r —harmless , doubt less , bu t of ten super f ic ia l an d s l ig ht—i s a menace to the rea l devel opm ent of mo ra l i ty.I find it, in eig ht or nin e cases ou t of ten , to be me re lya joke or horse- laugh not backed by l i fe 's t r a g e d yo r t e a r s ; w h i l e such a hu mo ur , un l ike the E n g l i s hh u m o u r w h i c h , as som ebod y said, was o f f i c i a l l ycrea ted by Punch, has an agreeable aspect of notp a t r o n i z i n g the readers, i t shows, on the ot her ha nd ,q u i t e a n A m e r i c a n - l i k e charac ter in fo rc ing themi n t o i ts perso nal com prehe nsio n or confidence. I t iss i m p l e - m i n d e d because i t rare ly cl aim s mo re th anl a u g h t e r ; i t is a g ai n s i m p l e - m i nd e d b ec au se i tm e r e l y looks , as anything else in A m e r i c a , u p o n t h equ ant i t y an d not on the qua l i ty. I cannot take thewo rds ser ious l y wh en we are t o l d t h a t the so-ca l ledA m e r i c a n hu m ou r i s the pr ide of A m e r i c a n hea r t s ;besides, I have seen proof e n o u g h t h a t its effectivenessi s of ten do ubt fu l—ind eed, the Am er i can s forge tsom et imes the i r ow n pr ide of hu mo ur qui te p l a i n l y .H e r e is , am on g m any o thers , one exam ple in the" Q u e s t i o n b e t w e e n J a p a n a n d A m e r i c a . " We arep e r i o d i c a l l y t o l d of the war and the Japanese p e r i l i nA m e r i c a n papers, y e l l o w or wh at no t ; and the o therday we were t o l d t h a t a certain A m e r i c a n senatorh a d d e c l a r e d t h a t to have Japanese inhabi tan ts inC a l i f o r n i a meant to keep and feed hateful spies int h e d o m a i n . W h a t a l ack o f " t h e sense of h u m o u r " !I read i n the first p art o f the art ic le " T h e M i s s i o no f H u m o u r , " b y a s c h o l a rl y A m e r i c a n l a d y, t h ef o l l o w i n g w o rd s : " J u s t as the mo st e ffec t ive w ayto d isparage an au t hor or an acqu ain ta nce—an d we

hav e often occasio n to disparag e bo th—i s to sayt h a t he lacks a sense of hu m ou r, so the mo st effectivec r i t i c i s m we can pass u po n a na tio n is to den y i tt h i s v a l u a b l e q u a l i t y . " I n d e e d t h e sense o f h u m o u ri s the most va luable qual i ty of one ' s l i f e o r n a t i o n ;bu t w hy do some Am er i can s a t leas t forge t th e i rp r i d e o f h u m o u r t o w a r d s u s J a p a n e s e ? W h y d o est h e i r sense o f h u m o u r f a i l to appear when i t shouldap pe ar ? I t i s fa r f rom m y id ea to say t h a t t heA m e r i c a n hu m o u r of the present t i me is bu t a sorto f r e c r e a t i o n ; b u t I s h o u l d l i k e to say t h a t it isf ed by the unre a l i ty of the so-ca l l ed A m e r i c a n o p t im i s m , an d i t has , na tu ra l ly , no foot i ng on l i fe 'si n e v i t a b l e rea l i sm . Wh a t I wa nt to say i s t h a t t he

A m e r i c a n h u m o u r needs to be aroused to consciousness of i t se l f , an d to be tau ght a rea l pro pos i t i ont o w a r d l i f e . E v e n i n A m e r i c a the age of irres pon sibl el a u g h t e r a n d o p t i m i s m i s a l r e a d y p a s s e d ; t h e t i m ehas a r r iv ed wh en hu m ou r a l so sho ul d ac t a t rue par ti n l i f e . T h e A m e r i c a n hu m o u r i s s t ro ng enoug h tocast off i ts super fici al exag gera tio n, w h i c h as l i te ra turei s r e a l l y o l d - f a s h i o n e d a n d c o w a r d l y, a n d i t is o l deno ug h to lea rn , as M e r e d i t h was ha pp y to say, t hes m i l e of the m i n d . Ta k e o f f y o u r c l o w n ' s p o w d e ra n d p a i n t a n d b e c o m e r e a l , y o u A m e r i c a n h u m o u r ,t o s teer a wise course am id the grave , confused mo ra lq u e s t i o n s . W e e x p e c t m a n y t h i n g s f rom y o u .

W h e n I was sho wn by Si r O w e n S e a m a n o f Puncha l a rg e r o u n d t a b l e i n t h e office ( w i t h t h e c a r v e d

n a m e s o f T h a c k e r a y a n d m y b e l o v e d D u M a u r i e ra n d m an y others) wher e once a wee k those E n g l i s hp r o f e s s i o n a l l au ghter-m akers or, mo re t rue to say,t h e s m i l e - m a k e r s , ser ious an d si lent i n face perha psmo re th an La m b' s Qua kers , used to s i t for theman ufa c tur e of hu m ou r or mer r im ent , I a t oncefel t as if I ha d dis cov ere d the true rea son w hyt h e E n g l i s h h u m o u r w a s r a t h e r u n n a t u r a l , f o r c e d ,a l w a y s re f lec t ive and even phi losophica l , but noti m p u l s i v e ; i t is , un l ik e the huge l aug hter of A m e r i c a nh u m o u r , a s m i l e d e c i d e d l y s a r d o n i c , w h i c h is s t i l laf ra id to lose i ts pride of aristocratic s c h o l a r l i n e s s ;i t s fear of dem ocr a t ic open-minded ness m akes i tu n n e c e s s a r i l y l o n e l y an d sad. I have m an y a reasonn o w to say t h a t the im po r ta t io n of the so-ca l l edA m e r i c a n h u m o u r i n t o E n g l a n d w i l l do a gr eatserv ice in br ightening up the E n g l i s h l i f e , w h i c hhas been depressed an d da rke ned by the presentW a r . A n d a t the same t im e I shou ld say t h a t it isthe very t ime for the A m e r i c a n h u m o u r a t h o m e t ol e a r n to stop i ts lau ghte r or j o k e ; this is the t im eto rem in d the Am er i can s to f ree themselves f rom th ei l l u s i o n of an age of op t im is t ic ex t ra vagan za , no ww h e n they see such a hu m an t raged y in a l l Eu ro pe .A m e r i c a sho ul d also enter in to the age wh en noabsol ute inde pende nce i n act io n is to be tol erat ed inthe so lu t ion of the proble ms of hu ma ni ty and thew o r l d ; how can the A m e r i c a n h u m o u r a l o n e h o l di t s ow n ol d ma squ era di ng? A s a p iece of l i t e ra t urei t shou ld be ru l ed by the meani ng of mo der n l i te ra ture ,w h i c h has left ro m an ti ci sm even for the real ism ofR u s s i a n fas h i on ; and to become the best l i t e r a t u r e ,of i t s own k i n d , i t shou ld leave the qua nt i t a t iv es tand ard a nd a im a t the t rue qua l i ty. ( I say th isas if I were speakin g on qu al i t y before qu an ti ty fo r

any other phase of A m e r i c a n l i f e . ) I say t h a t thed a y s of A r t e m u s Wa r d , M a r k T w a i n , B i l l N y e , e v e nthe day s of M r . D o o l e y an d George A d e, a re a l read ypassing, not because the y di d not, as Chester tondesired in his Defence of Nonsense, represent thea l legor ica l v iew of the w hol e univ erse or Cosm os,but because f rom the ver y weakness of the ir bei ngtoo opt im is t ic they d id not he lp mu ch for l i fe 'ss p i r i t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t ; i n a n o t h e r w a y o f s a y i n g ,f rom bei ng rath er o utsid e of real l i f e , t h e y d i d n o tmake the A m e r i c a n l i f e either r icher or int enser.T h e n e w h u m o u r o f A m e r i c a shou ld not become at h i n g t o p l a y w i t h , bu t i t mu st be a true l i t era tur eb u i l t w i t h h u m a n b l o o d a n d s o u l ; a n d i t s h o u l d

act to strengthen life's conscience and force, keepingth e b e l i e f t h a t a l i t erat ure grows mo re perfect an dtru e as i t grow s sim ple r. I t sho ul d not, as i n theo l d e n days, be i ts office to amuse people, but tob a c k h u m a n i t y a n d l i f e (the nation, of course) w i t hi t s o w n b e l i e f should be i t s greates t a i m . Y o u m u s tn o t t h i n k t h a t I w i s h t o m a k e h u m o u r a s y m b o l o fw i s d o m ; what I want to say is t h a t w e w i s h toma ke oursel ves wise eno ugh by i ts thr ice blessedq u a l i t y to laugh or smi le , as somebody sa id , whenwe should otherwise be in danger of c r y i n g .

A s I sai d before, I do no t beli eve i n the A m e r i c a nhu mo ur of the present f o r m because i t has not realismf o r i t s bac kgr ou nd . I never mea n to break thedemocra t ic aspec t of the A m e r i c a n h u m o u r f romany po in t ; bu t as the me anin g of A m e r i c a n d e m o c r a c yhas changed to-day f rom t h e c o u n t r y ' s l o s i n g th eabsolu te so l i ta r iness in contac t w i t h t h e i n e v i t a b l e ,d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t of the m od er n age, the A m e r i c a nh u m o u r t o o , a s a l i t e r a r y d e m o n s t r a t i o n , s h o u l dundergo the proper change qui te na tura l of then a t i o n . T h e A m e r i c a n hu m ou r, at least at present,o n l y serves as a c l o w n a l o n g l i fe 's h i g h w a y.

I s h o u l d l i k e t o r e m i n d t h e A m e r i c a n h u m o r i s tt h a t l i f e a n d t h e w o r l d are not so l i g h t -hear ted as i tof ten sup pos es ; the t rue hu m ou r i s bu t a not herphase of the r e a l t e a r l a u g h i n g l y i n t e r p r e t e d , a n d i s ,

le t m e say, a t w i n sister or bro the r of the t e a r differe n t l y b o r n b y a t w i s t o f e v o l u t i o n . I w o u l d a d v i s e

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



t he wor ld- famous A m e r i c a n h u m o u r t h a t i t shou ldbe more se r ious if it w a n t s to act, with other phasesof A m e r i c a n l i t e r a t u r e , in solving the d e s t i n y of the

n a t i o n .

Y O N E N O G U C H I

N a k a n o , J a p a n .

E N V Y

I E N V Y you, I e n v y you,

a m i d t he r u m b l e an d h o o t an d c l a t t e rof L o n d o n ' s traffic.

H a p p y p a i r !

Yo u r left an d r i g h t h a n d s dropan d find e a c h o t h e rand wring e a c h o t h e r.

W h i t e in th e sun

from hat to shoes,only the p i n k of your ankles showing

t h r o u g h t he whi te s tock ings .

S t r a i g h t - l i m b e d ,firm-bosomed,soft in the folds of your blouse.

A n d you , O You t h ,

wi t h the flush on your cheeks,i n y o u r eyes a h a p p y a d m i r a t i o n ,I e n v y you.

Yo u r hands seek and wring each o t h e r ;

your l imbs a t t r a c t each o t h e rt h r o u g h t h e i r c l o t h i n g ;

and you would m a r r yi f t h i s an d t h a t c o n c u r r e d .Fooli sh, oh fool ish !

It is not your you th ,y o u r s t ra igh tness , your cleanness, your bloom,I e n v y ;it is y o u r v i rg i n i t y.

Y o u would part with it in a burs t of joy,and would not know your loss,p e r c e i v i n g i t .

B u t b e a u t y, — . . .

do you not feel i t upo n y o u ? . . .S t r i v e to r e a c h t he grape, but do not pluck i t .

T h e ges ture is all.F . S. F L I N T

PASSING PARIS

A P A S S A G E from M . P i e r r e M il l e in his c h a r m i n gEn Croupe de Bettone (Crès, 1 fr. 25) :

" Yo u ' r e not cross w i t h me at least, are yo u ? "

" A n d why should I b e ? "

" F o r be in g a refugee. For a refugee, I may t e l l you, is a

man who sits down at your table, who eats as though he had

been fasting for a fortnight, and sometimes he may have been.

A n d who says afterwards: ' A h ! I don't feel at home.' . . ."

He was f u l l of energy, certain of victory. The home, the works,

w o u l d be rebuilt. Thing s w o u l d go w e l l after the war—business

w o u l d be bett er th an ever. A n d w i t h the businesslike manner

natural to his compatriots he pointed out what w o u l d have to

be done to set things going again. B ut suddenly he int errupted

himself :

" D ' y o u know what moved me most, what won't leave my

h e a d ? "

" N o . The ruins, the fires, the bombardment?"

" I t should be that. A n d yet it is something else. . . . I am

almost ashamed t o own up to it , it is almost t r i v i a l . . . i t waswhen the y came i n, those G er mans ! The y sang. . . ."

" W e l l ? "

" W e l l , I knew those people were stained w i t h crimes, I knew

they were the assassins of B e l g i u m ; but I c o u l d not help admiring.

I t was so be aut if ul! Th ey marche d parade-fashi on i n t ha t

step w h i c h is so ridiculous; their uniforms, a dirty green colour,

were covered w i t h wine and grease —filt hy! B ut all that was

lost i n the ir song. Gr ave songs, in three parts, semi-religious.

Not a voice was out of tune , all were in ti me ; i n a word, music,

real music, popular tunes, but not vulgar, simple and yet learned.A n d at that moment I was, I t e l l you, more wretched than

ever! I thought : ' We shall be victorious, I am sur e: we

shall chase them from here, we shall impose peace terms w h i c hshall keep them from doing harm—but that we shall never have!'

C a n you explain to me why it seems impossible to re vi ve a

popular sense of true music in F ra n c e ? "

I c o u l d not explain, but it seems to me too evident t ha t

most unfortunately he is right. Certain southern departments

exc epted, there is no doubt that our popular soul is to-day

incapable of expression othe rwise th an by unisons, and wha t

unisons ! Nin et y-ni ne Fre nc hme n out of a hun dred are unabl e

to retain a single musical phrase w h i c h might happen to be—

I w i l l not say complicat ed but a little l o n g . . . . The popularFrench ideal of music takes t he form of the most stupidly senti

mental waltz on the one hand or, on the other, of the vulgar

nigger chorus : degradat ion of bot h joy and melan ch oly, impo

tence in serene, grave enthusi asm. . . .

So m u c h also for " T i p p e r a r y " and the Br i t i sh

musical null i ty which M. P i e r r e Mil l e t r i e s t o e x p l a i n

away by the s u b s t i t u t i o n of b a r b a r i t y b y c i v i l i z a t i o n

—an e x p l a n a t i o n which is like a sortie de secours, or

an escape from a di lemma.

Fr om the same author :

A l l that is terrible, and I say: " I t is terrible ." B ut what

is cruellest of a ll , most humiliating, is that my horror comes not

from my senses, but from my reason, because my nerves expected

i t , knew it, have worn out their capacity of suffering and revolt.

Th e refugee is not shocke d by thi s callousness.

" I am l i k e you," he s a i d . " When I came there on the way

from H o l l a n d I was so w e l l prepared for what I saw that i t

didn't touch me ; no, not i n the le ast, not even to see my house

f a l l e n into the cellar. I should never have thought that so

much hardness of heart c o u l d be opposed to one's own pain.

It 's probably because the calami ty is too bi g, uni ve rsal. On e

says to oneself: ' N o doubt, it had to take place.' Or perh aps

one f a i l s to unders tan d; it is be yond one's grasp, l i k e a noise

w h i c h is so l o u d that it stuns you. B ut there is one th in g that

tears the heart, all the same. Y o u may have seen ev er yth in g

without weeping ; but that must move you to tears.

" O h ! it is nothi ng, nothi ng at al l. One blushes that i t

should so impress one. . . . I don't need to t e l l you that i n t ha t

coun try e very one has a dog : these for sport or as pet s, th ose

as watch-dogs. A n d the y have stayed i n the t own, these dogs,,

when the inhabitants f led or were sh ot ; th ey have stayed i n a

town where not a single stone is in its place. Ho w th ey kee p

a l i v e , how they do not die of starvation, I cannot t e l l you. N o

doubt they do their own hunting, catch rats, scour the country.

B u t th ey retur n as fast as th ey can and all group toget her at

the entrance to the town, on the road.

" T h e r e may be two hun dred of th em, perhaps th ree —hounds,

spaniels, sheep-dogs, te rrie rs, even lapdogs, tiny ridiculous

animals; and they wait, w i t h the ir heads turn ed in th e same

direction w i t h a look of int ense ly sad and passionate int ere st.

What th ey are ex pecti ng is easy to unders tand. Sometimes one

of the former cit iz ens of the to wn makes up his mind and comes

back from H o l l a n d . Th e longing to see his country, to findout what has been made of his house, to rout among the ruins,

is stronger than eve rythi ng, th an fear or hatred. A n d someti mes

i t happens that one of the dogs recognizes him. His dog ! If

y o u c o u l d see t h a t ! C o u l d you but i magine i t ! This f l o c k of

dogs, w i t h ears point in g as far as the y can , see a man on the roa d

from H o l l a n d , a man without a helmet, not in uniform. Th e pain

f u l anxiety, the motionless anxiety of all these staring beasts,

staring as hard as they can—dogs have not very good eyes—and who scent, scent at a long distance, because their noses

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



ar e better t han their eyes. A n d at last the leap, the great

leap, of one of these dogs when it has smelt its mas te r ; it s w i l d ,savage race on the road, ravaged and furrowed by guns an d

heavy motor convo ys; its joy, its joyful bark, its dancing t a i l ,

its skipping paws, its l icking tongue, its whole body which is

one tremor of jo y! I t doesn't leave the man now, it doesn't

want to lose hi m again. Fo r a day , or two days, it sticks to his

back, without eating, and leaves wit h him. Bu t the others,

what becomes of t h e m ? They are always on the road, always

o n duty. A nd when they see the dog leave, the dog which has

at last found what they want always, what they want t i l l their

last day, they al l raise their snouts in despai r and whine, whi ne

fo r ever, w i t h great howls filling the heavens and which last

t i l l there's nothi ng left on the road . Th en they stop; bu t they

don't budge. They remai n. They hope.

" A n d you weep, monsieur, when you see t h a t : yo u weep

l ike they do—floods of tears. I beg you r pardo n. . . ."

T o be also especial ly re com men de d in this c o l l e c -t ion : La Mort du Gentleman, wherein it is shownt ha t conscr ip tio n make s an end of t ha t pecul ia r lyB r i t i s hspeciali ty.

* * * *

T h e P r i x Go ncou rt has been aw ar de d to M . H e n r iBarbusse, whose L'Enfer was reviewe d in these columnslast year. Fe w, if any, other E n g l i s hpubl ica t ionsh a d , I believe, dealt w i t h i t . Since then M . Barbussehas published Le Feu, w h i c hobtained the pr ize . Thea t t r ibut ion for 1914 has not yet been voted.

* * * *

T h e death has occurred of Théodule Ribot, th ephilosopher—who resented being thus qualif ied—

author of L' At te nt i on , Les Maladies de la Volonté,Les Maladies de la Mémoire, etc., w h i c hwent throughas ma ny edi tions as po pu la r novels. Oth er of hisworks studied the Passions, the Logic of Sentiments,the Creative Imagination. Théodule R i b o t discoveredt w o new princi pl es : psycho -p hysio lo gy an d psycho-pathology—which discoveries founded a school ofinvestigators. He rea l ized t ha t the study of theunheal thy condit ion was as essential in psycho-philosophical resea rch as the stu dy of the he al thyform.

M . C.

E Z R APOUND

T R A N S L A T E D F R O MT H E F R E N C H O F J E A N D E

B O S S C H È R E

I I

NOWwe come to the Lustra of E z r a P o u n d .It is the mom en t to get awa y from myselfa n d ask what other people thi nk about Po u nd .

W h a t po sit io n has he i n the crowd of po ets? I nthe "p o r t r a i t " of Po un d I ske tched out an apprec iat ion of his wor th, but M r . C a r l Sandburg has lookedat the poet's work from a great distance—from acrossthe A t l a n t i c . H i s ju dgment is concerned ra ther

w i t h the work or the attitude of the man than w i t hthe man himself. M r . Sand burg writes :

I f I were driven to name one ind ivid ual who, in the Engli sh

language, by means of his own examples of creative art in poetry,

has done most of l i v i n g men to incite new impulses in p oetr y,

the chances are I would name E z r a Pound.

This statement is made reservedly, out of know ing the wo rk

of Pound and being somewhat close to it three years or so. . . .

If, however, as a friendly stranger in a smoking compartment,

y o u sho ul d casual ly ask me for an off-hand op ini on as to w ho

is the best man wr iti ng poetr y to-day, I should pro bably answer,

" E z r a Po und ." A l l talk on modern poetry, by people who

k n o w, ends by dragging in E z r a P o u n d somewhere. He may

be named only to be cursed as wanton and mocker, poseur,

trifler, and vagrant. Or he may be classed as filling a niche

to-day l ike that of Ke at s in a preced ing epoch. The point is,

he w i l l be mentioned.

T h a t is true. F i r s t o f a l l , Po und w i l l be mentionedbecause he is the best-known poet of his generation.Is i t because he is the best poe t? W h o is the greatestF r e n c h , Ger man, Ru ss ian , or I ta l ian poet to -d ay?O n e mi ght ask this que stion of the Aca de mi es, of the

N o b e l t r ibunals . T h e i r answer would certainly notbe the same as ours. N o t because we should giveanother name, but a whole l i s t of names, whe rep r o b a b l y the one quoted by the wiseacres w o u l d no tbe found.

E v e r y good poet has a group of qualities w h i c hma k e hi m a poe t. Is he who possesses al l those wek n o w of the true st p o e t? Is i t he who , l a c k i n gi nseveral , possesses a new qu al it y i n an un us ua l degree?Is there a hierarchy among these qu al it i es? Is therea cer ta in inferiori ty of talent for w h i c h the finestgifts w i l l not atone? D o not let us tr y to classP o u n d or any other poet.

B u t there is a point at w h i c hone can define. W eca n sa y w i t h a l i t t le more cert ai nty i n what degreesuch and such a poet has one of the poetic qualities.It r ema ins to be seen whe ther we are a l l agree d asto the val ue of this q ua li ty, or whether i t is the k i n dt ha t w i l l shine out i n the w o o fof the poetic fabric.

I f the name of P o u nd comes into a ll discussionso n ar t i t is because he has, to an un us ua l degree,cer ta in qualit ies, and t ha t at least two of the m arev e r y apparent, and greatly appreciated.

H e is free and without rhetoric—no one more so.H i s v i s i o n is d i re ct ; he does not use the im age ,but shows the things themselves w i t h power. Thisis indeed a quality of the Imagistes. His indepen

dence comes from the fact t ha t he has dug into thepast w i t h a keener mind, and more profoundly thanis necessary for or di nar y cult ure. The num ber ofinfluences he has passed unde r have also freed hi m ,a n d he has made his departure from the k n o w n w i t hrare audacity.

Formulae a nd rul es no lo nger l i m i t and cut offh is perspecti ves, but are a pre tex t for br ea ki ngloose. H e does not respect originals. How indeedca n a po et be ma de ou t of any one wh o has no tdestroyed or pul led down everything, if only for afew hours?

T h e poet i s a scepti c ma dl y i n love, who wants i nspite of eve ryt hin g to create his dr eam , U p to no w

P o u n d has beat en out a pa th for his cre ati ons; heup ro ots weeds of aesthetics an d mo ra l s; he m ak esone look i n fro nt, not to the sid e, or thro ugh a v e i l ofpassive acceptance. Ev er ywh er e his poems inci tem a n to exist, to profess a beco mi ng egotism, wit hou tw h i c hthere ca n be no re al al tr ui sm.

I beseech yo u enter your l i fe .I beseech you learn to say " I "

When I question you.

F o r you are no part , but a whole ;

N o portion, but a being.

T h a t at least is the i l l u s i o nhe gives at mo men ts

when one wants to see the w o r l das a poet ; t ha t i sto sa y i n one's mos t l u c i d and hum an moments.O n e mus t belie ve i n one's own existence, and thi sfa i th begins w i t h negati on. One mus t be capa bleo f reacting to s t i m u l i for a moment, as a real, l i v eper son, eve n i n face of as mu ch of one's ow n powe rsas are arr aye d against one, bal ance d by an imm ed ia tea v o w a l :

A n d who are we, who know that last intent,

T o plague to-morrow with a testament !

B u t a k i n d of disease called hope cannot be cu tout of a man 's hear t. H e goes on believing i n thesuccessive moments . It is great poe try, th e in t ima t edrama of this struggle, to go on believing in spiteo f th e app ear ance of empti ness. The groans, the

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



v i r i l e comp la i n t , the revol t of the poe t , a l l w h i c hshows h is emot ion —tha t i s poe t ry .

Speak agai nst unconsci ous oppression,

Speak against the tyranny of the unimaginative,

Speak against bonds.

B e against all forms of oppression,

G o out and defy opinion.

T h i s is th e o l d cr y of the poe t , but more precise,as an ex pres sion of fran k disgust :

G o to the adolescent who are smothered in f a m i l y .O , how hideous it is

T o see three generations of one house gathered together !

It is l i k e an old tree without shoots,

A n d w i t h some branches rotted and f a i l i n g .

E a c h poem holds out of these cries of rev olt ordis gus t, bu t th ey are the result of his s t i l l h o p i n gan d f ee l ing :

L e t us take a rms against this sea of stupidit ies.

B u t despi te t he ir on y, one feels his emo tio n :

O W o r l d , I am sorry for you.O most unfortunate age !

Nevertheless, he often rises into peace and theimpe rso na l : he w a n t s to detach himself , and says :

W h y shoul d we stop at a ll for what I t hin k ?

P o u n d k n o w s v e r y w e l l wha t awaits hi m. H e hasexper ience of the f o l l y of the Ph il i st i nes who read hisverse . R e a l pa in is bo rn of this stup id inte rpret at io n,

and one does not realize how deep it is unles s one ca nfeel , th rou gh the ejaculat ions an d laughter, whathas caused these wounds , whi ch a re made deeper b ywhat he knows, and what he has lost .

In a crude poem he has also expressed his surprisea n d ange r :

O my fellow-sufferers, songs of my youth,

A lot of asses praise you because you are " v i r i l e " ;W e , you , I ! We a re " B e d B l o o d s " !

Imagine it, my fellow-sufferers—

Our maleness l i f t s us out of the ruck ;

W h o ' d have foreseen i t ?

O my fellow-sufferers, we went ou t unde r the trees,We were in especial bored w i t h male stupidity .

We went forth gathering delicate thoughts,

Our fantastikon del igh ted to serve us.We were not exasperated w i t h women,

for the female is ductil e.

A n d now you hear what is said to us:

We are compared to t ha t sort of person

Wh o wanders about announcing his sex

A s if he had j ust di scovered it.

L e t us leave this matter, my songs,

an d return to t ha t w h i c h concerns us.

H i s appe al to strengt h a nd l iber ty can onl y be underst ood by such Phil i st i nes as a sort of porn ogra phy,or at least , as an appeal to b r u t e force.

III

T h e verses I have quoted show how far he isf r o m any decept ion . Hi s t one is admi rabl e wh enhe t h u s speaks the tr ut h. I t is famil iar, but sop e r m e a t e d w i t h t r u t h t h a t i t seems harsh . Thei r o n y o n l y decreases to make way for mischief, andthe n misc hief gives wa y to sarcasm.

T h i s t o ne , wh ic h is at once joc un d an d keen, is oneo f P o u n d ' s q u a l i t i e s . O v i d . C a t u l l u s — h e does no td is own the m. H e only uses these accents for hisfami l ia r s ; wi th the others he is on the edge ofpara dox , pamphle t eer ing , indeed of abuse . W h e nhe comes out of his di st ra ct io n he seems to end by

t a k i n g one 's ar m. Of ten his man ner is more b rus que .El sewh ere he pain ts in a hom ely way, sometimes wi thcor roded co lours . A n d somet imes he speaks b e h i n dth e scenes.

" L e t t he r e be commerce between us," he says t oWa l t W h i t m a n . " I m a k e a p a c t w i t h y o u , Wa l tW h i t m a n — I have de t e s t ed y o u l o n g e n o u g h . "

The n he i s char ming . " O r wi th two l igh t feet,i f i t please y o u ! "

B u t nowhere do the move men t an d the t o n e u n i t eso w e l l to crea te a sense of s t r ange l i f e as i n theverses where he announces H e r m e s . T h e y p a n t ,they a re hu r r ie d ; he foresees t h a t he is no t a lo ne ;t h a t Her mes , the ingenious rasca l , the mal ici ouscatcher of men, follows h i m : he foresees m o c k e r y,a n d t h a t one must speak despite the presence ofthe go d :

Th e fricksome Hermes is here ;

He moves behind me

Eager to catch my words,

Eager to spread them w i t h rumour,T o set upon them his change

Crafty or subtle ;

T o alter them to his purpose ;

B u t do th ou speak true , even to the le tter.

T h i s emphasis, this brusque note , and his way ofput t ing th ings a re an impor tan t p a r t of his te chn iqu e—i f there be here a technique.

I have said t h a t his images are designs fr om n a t u r e ,not transposi t ions, metapho rs, nor fragments ofallegories, derived from elements o f s y m b o l i s m .

B e a d this moder n paint ing , ha rd as a tr ia ngle .I give i t bot h for the rh yt hm an d the har d, clear

out l ine , with i ts colours of an Oriental market :

T H E S T U D Y I N A E S T H E T I C S

Th e very small children in patched clothing,

B e i n g smitten w i t h an unusual wisdom,

Stopped in their play as she passed them

A n d cried up from their cobbles,

Guarda! Ahi, guarda ! ch' è be' a!

B u t three years after this

I heard the young Dante, whose name I do not know—

F o r there are, in Sirmione, twenty-eight young

Dantes and thirty-four C a t u l l i .

A n d there had been a great catch of sardines,

A n d his elders

Were pack ing them i n the great wood en boxes

F o r the market in B r e s c i a , and he

Leapt about, snatching at the bright fishA n d getting in both of their ways ;

A n d i n v a i n they commanded him to sta fermo!

A n d when they w o u l d not let him arrange

Th e f ish in the boxes

He stroked those w h i c h were already arranged,

Murmuring for his own satisfaction

This identical phrase,

Ch' è be' a.

A n d at this I was m i l d l y abashed.

I quo t e these o the r lines an d no mo re." I h a v e seen their smiles f u l l of t e e t h . " " A n d

th e fish swim in the lake and do not even ow n clot hi n g " (from Salutation). " T h y f ac e a s a r i v e r w i t hl i g h t s . "

He re the imag e is oppo sed to the object , as in ad y p t i c h . l ike H o m e r , b u t i t i s t r i u m p h a n t l y s i m p l e .Some poems are form ed of an uni nt er ru pt ed succession of clear, bold p a t t e r n s . E l s e w h e r e , a m o n gabs t r ac t thoughts , he thr ows out a spl end id ph ra se ,l i k e the stroke of an axe, a flash of silver. " U n k i l l -able infan ts of the po or ," he says, w i t h a s h a k e ofthe head. " B l a c k l i g ht n i ng . " " B u t seems l i k e aperson just gone "—a line which is a t r u e i m a g e .

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



T h e poem Salutation, f r om w h i c h I have quot edtwo verses, is a series of delightfully o r i g i n a l mots.I n short , I r epea t , in sp i te of a l l h is l i te rary inspi rat ions an d a l l h is consc ious imi ta t i on , Po u nd is them os t o r i g i n a l of l i f e ' s spectators. In the anci entw o r l d of verse he is seldom old.

(To be concluded)

[ N O T E . The draw ing of Mr . Po un d in the last issue of T H E

E G O I S T was by M . Jean de Bosschère, the writer of the arti cle.—

E D I T O R . ]

T A R R

B Y W Y N D H A M L E W I S

P A R T V

A M E G R I M O F H U M O U R

C H A P T E R V

T A R Rsoon regre t ted th is las t an t i -c l imax s tageof his adventur e . H e w o u l d have left K r e i s -l e r alon e i n futu re, bu t he felt t h a t by fre

quent ing h im he c o u l d save Ber th a f rom some thingdisagreeable. W i t h disquie t and m i s g i v i n g eve rynight now he sat in front of his Prussian friend.H e wa t che d h i m g radua l l y i m b i b i n g enough spi r i t sto work hi m up to his pi tc h of char acte rist ic madness.

" A f t e r al l , let us hear re all y wha t i t al l means,y o u r K r e i s l e r s tun t , a n d K r e i s l e r ! " he said to herfour or five days af ter h is reappearance . " D o yo uk n o w t h a t I act as a dam, or rather a dyke, to hisoutrageous flood of l iquorous sp i r i t s every n ight?O n l y m y insig nific ant for m is betwe en y ou a nddes t ruc t ion , or you and a very unpleasant K r e i s l e r ,at any r a t e .— H a v e y ou seen hi m whe n he's dr un k?— W h a t , after al l, does Kreisler mea n? Sa t i s fy myc u r i o s i t y. "

B e r t h a shuddered an d looked a t h i m w i t h d r a m a t ic a l l y wide-open eyes, as though t h e r e were no answer.

" I t ' s no th ing , Sorber t , no th i ng ," she sa id , ast hough K r e i s l e r were the bub oni c plagu e and shewere making l ight of i t .

Y e t a protest ha d to be made . H e ha d r ath erneglected the coincidence of his a r r i v a l and Be r tha ' sre fusa l to see K r e i s l e r . He mus t avoid f ind ingh i m s e l f manoe uvred in to app ear ing the cause. At r a n q u i l and sentimental revenant was the rôle heha d chosen. U p to a po in t he enco urag ed Ber th ato see his boo n comp an io n an d relax her sudd enexclus iveness . H e hes i ta te d to car r y out tho rou ghlyh i s par t of go-between an d reconci ler. A t len gth hebegan to make inqui r ies . A f t e r al l , to hav e to h o l dback his successor to the favours of a lady, fromg o i n g and se iz ing t hose r i gh t s ( p r e sumab ly t empora r i l yd e n i e d him), was a s t r ange s i t ua t i on . A t any momen tn o w it seemed l i k e l y t h a t K r e i s l e r w o u l d t u rn onh i m . T h i s w o u l d s i m p l i f y matters . Bet te r leavelovers to fight out their own quarrels and not take upthe ungra tefu l rô le of in ter ferer an d vol unt ar y pol ice

m a n . A l l his retrospective pleasure was being spoilt .B u t he was commit ted to remain t he r e for the present .T o get over his sensation of dupe, he was more sociablew i t h K r e i s l e r tha n he fe l t . The Ger man in terpre tedth is as an hyp ocr is y. Hi s conte mpt an d suspic ionof the pecu l iar reven ant grew.

B e r t h a was te mpt ed t o expla in , i n as dra mat i c aman ne r as possi ble, the situ ati on to Ta rr . Bu t shehes i t a ted a l ways because she thou ght i t w o u l d l e adto a fight. Sh e was often , as it was, an xi ou s forTa r r .

"S o r be r t , I t h i n k I ' l l go t o Ge rman y a t once , " sheS a i d to hi m, on the aftern oon of his second v i s i t t oR e n é e L i p m a n n ' s .

" W h y , because you ' re af ra id of K r e i s l e r ? "" N o , but I th ink i t ' s b e t t e r . "

" B u t w h y, a l l o f a s u d d e n ? "" M y sister w i l l be home from B e r l i n , i n a da y o r

t w o — "" A n d yo u ' d l e ave me here t o ' m i n d ' t h e d o g . "" N o . — D o n ' t see K r e i s l e r any more , Sorber t . Do g

i s t h e wo rd i n de ed ! He i s m a d : ganz verucht!—P r o m i s e me, So rb e r t "—she t ook h i s ha nd —" no t t ogo to the café an y m o r e ! "

" D o you want him at your door at twelve toni g h t ? —I fee l I may be p l ay in g the par t of—gooseberry, is i t — ? "

" D o n ' t , Sorbe r t . I f you on ly kn ew !— He washere th is morning, hammering for near ly h a l f a nhou r. Bu t al l I ask yo u is to go to the café no mo re .Ther e is no need for yo u to be mi xe d up i n a llt h i s . I onl y am to b l ame ."

" I wond er what is the real exp la nat io n of K r e i s l e r ? "Sorber t sa id , pul led up by what she ha d sa id . " H a v ey o u known him long—before you knew me, fori n s t a n c e ? "

" N o , onl y a week or two—s inc e yo u went aw ay ."

" I must ask K r e i s l e r . But he seems to have veryp r i m i t i v e not ions about h imsel f . "

" D o n ' t bother any more w i t h t h a t man, Sorber t .Y o u don 't do an y good. Do n' t go to the café ton igh t ! "

" W h y t o - n i g h t ? "" A n y n i g h t . "K r e i s l e r c e r t a i nl y w as a " n e w l i n k " — t o o m u c h .

T h e c h i e f cause of separa tion h ad become an elementof i n s id ious rapprochement.

H e left her si lent ly apprehe nsive, star ing at hi mm o u r n f u l l y.

S o t h a t night, after his second v i s i t to FräuleinL i p m a n n ' s , he did not seek out K r e i s l e r at his usualheadqua r t e r s w i t h his first enthusiasm.

C H A P T E R V I

A L R E A D Y before a considerable p i l e of saucers, representing his evening's menu of drink, K r e i s l e r sat quites t i l l , his eyes very bright, s m i l i n g to h imsel f . Tar r d i dnot at once ask him "what K r e i s l e r m e a n t . " " K r e i sl e r " l o o k e d a s t hough i t mean t some th ing a l i t t l edifferent on t h a t par t icul ar evening. H e ackno wledge dTa r r ' s a r r i v a l s l i g h t l y , seeming to includ e hi m in hisreverie . I t was a sort of si lent in vi ta ti on to " c o m ei n s i d e . " The n they sa t wi th out speaking, an unpleasantatmos phere of poli ce-c ourt roma nce for Tar r.

Ta r r s t i l l kept h is re t rospect ive lu xu ry before h i m,as i t mainta ined the K r e i s l e r side of the business ina des i red perspect ive . Ana s ta sya , who m he hadseen t h a t even ing, ha d come as a dive rsi on. H e gotback , w i t h her, in to the sphere of " r e a l " th in gsa g a i n , no t f a n c i f u l retrospective ones.

T h i s w o u l d be a reply to K r e i s l e r ( an Anas t a syafo r yo ur Ott o) an d restore the balanc e. A t presen tth ey were exi st in g on a sort of three- legge d affair.T h i s i n c l u s i o n of the fourth party w o u l d m a k eth ings s o l i d and less precarious again.

T o mainta in h is rô le of in termediary and go on

m o m e n t a r i l y keeping h is eye on Kreis ler ' s threa teningfigure, he mu s t h i m s e l f be definitely engaged in anew di rec t io n , bey ond the suspic ion of hanker ingsafter his old l o v e .

D i d he w i s h t o en te r i n t o a new a t tachment w i t hA n a s t a s y a ! T h a t c o u l d be dec ided later. H e w o u l dmake the first steps, r e t a i n he r if possible, an d outof t h i s cha rmi ng expedient p leasant th ings m i g h tcome. H e was com pel led to req uis it i on her for them o m e n t . She might be regarded as a t ra vel l in gc o m p a n i o n . Th ro wn toge the r i nev i t ab ly on a stagec o a c h j ou rney, any th i ng migh t happen . De l i g h t ,advent ure , an d amusement was a lways achi eved :as his i t c h to see his humorous concubine is turnedi n t o a " r e t r o spe c t i v e l u xu ry , " v is it s t o t he L i p m a n nc i r c l e , mys te r i ous r e l a t i onsh ip w i t h K r e i s l e r . T h i s ,

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



i n i t s t u r n , s u d d e n l y t u r n i n g r a t he r p r i c k l y a n dp e r p l e x i n g , he no w, th ro ug h the me di um of a beaut i f u l w o m a n , t u r n s i t bac k again int o f u n ; notserious enough for Be au ty , destined, therefore,r a t h e r for her subtle, ro ugh, sat ir ic sister.

On ce An as ta sy a ha d been relegated to her placer a t h e r of exp edie nc y, he coul d thi nk of her wit hmor e f reedom. H e look ed forw ard wi th g u s t o to

h is work in her d i rec t ion .There w ou ld be no harm i n an t ic ip a t ing a l i t t l e .

She mig ht at once be br ou ght on to the boards, asthough the affair were already settled and ripe forp u b l i c i t y .

" D o y o u k n o w a g i r l c a l l e d A n a s t a s y a Va s e k ?She is to be fo und at yo ur Ge rm an friend's , FräuleinL i p m a n n ' s . "

" Y e s , I k no w her, " said K r e i s l e r , l o o k i n g u p w i t hun wav er in g b lankness . Hi s in t rospec t ive smi lev a ni s h ed . " W h a t t h e n ? " w as i m p l i e d in his look.W h a t a fel low this En gl is hma n was, to be su re!W h a t was he after n o w ? An ast asy a was a muc hmore de l ica te po i n t wi t h h i m than Ber tha .

" I ' v e just got to k no w her. She's a char min g g i r l ,i sn ' t s h e ? " Tar r co uld no t qu i te make out Kre i s le r ' srecept ion of these innocent remarks .

" I s s h e ? " K r e i s l e r loo ke d at hi m almost wi thas ton ishment .

There is a point in l i f e bey ond whic h we mus th o l d people responsible for accidents and their unconsciousness. Innoc ence the n loses i ts meaning.B e y o n d th i s po in t Tar r had t ransgressed . W h e t h e rTa r r kn ew any thi ng or not , the essential reali ty wast h a t Ta rr was begin nin g to get at him wi th Anast asya,just having been for a week a problematic and officious

figure su dd en ly app ear ing betwee n him an d his pr eyo f the Rue Mart in e. The habi t of c i v i l i z e d res t ra in th a d k e p t K r e i s l e r baffled and passive for a week.A n n o y a n c e a t B e r t h a ' s access of s e l f - w i l l had beenconver ted in to angry i n t e r e s t i n his new self-electedbo on co mpa nio n. H e had been pre pari ng lately,thoug h, to bor ro w money f rom h im . Anas t asyabro ught o n the scene wa s a n o t h e r kett le of fish.

Wh at d i d th i s Tar r ' s p roceedings say ? They sa id :" B e r t h a L u n k e n w i l l have nothing more to do withy o u . Y o u m u s t n ' t ann oy her any more. I n themeant ime, I am gett ing on ver y w e l l w i t h A n a s t a s y aV a s e k ! "

A ques t ion t h a t p r e s e n t e d i tself to K r e i s l e r wa swhe the r T ar r ha d heard the whole stor y of his assaulto n his late fiancée? Th e po ssi bil it y of his k no wi ngthis inc reased his co ntemp t for Tarr .

K r e i s l e r was di sar med for the mom en t by thereme mbran ce of Ana st asy a. B y the person he hadregard ed as pe cu liar ly accessible bec omin g par adox ic a l l y out of his reac h, the most di stan t an d inacc essibl e—suc h as An as tas ya— seemed to be d raw n al i t t l e nearer.

" I s Fräulein Va s e k w o r k i n g i n a s t u d i o ? " heasked .

"S he ' s a t Ser rano ' s , I th i nk ," Tar r to l d h im ." S o you go to Fräulein L i p m a n n ' s ? "

" S o m e t i m e s . "K r e i s l e r reflected a l i t t l e ." I s h o u l d l i k e to see her again."Ta r r began to scent another myster ious muddle .

Wo u l d he never be free of He rr K re is le r? Perhap she was goin g to be fol low ed an d r i v a l l e d in th i s t oo ?W i t h del ibera te medi ta t ion K r e i s l e r a p p e a r e d to bec o m i n g rou nd to Tar r ' s op i n ion . For h i s p a r t too,Fräulein Vase k was a n ice you ng lady. " Y e s , shei s n i c e ! " H i s m a n n e r b e g an t o suggest t h a t Ta r rhad put her forward as a s u b s t i t u t e for Bertha !

F o r the res t of the evening K r e i s l e r ins i s ted upont a l k i n g a b o u t Ana st asy a. H o w was she d r e s s e d ?H a d she ment i oned h i m? e tc . Tar r fe lt inc l ine dto say, " B u t yo u don ' t und ers tan d! She i s for me.

Bertha i s y o. ur y o u n g l a d y n o w ! " O n l y in re f lec t ingo n this possible remar k, he was conf ronted wi th theo b v io u s r e p l y, " B u t is B e r t ha m y y o u ng l a d y ? "

(To be continued)

C O R R E S P O N D E N C E

D R E I S E R P R O T E S TTo the Editor of T H E E G O I S T

M A D A M ,— I n you r December number " A Memb er of the Authors '

League of A m e r i c a " attacked me for my outspoken c r i t i c i s m of

m y own disgraced and unfortunate c ount ry. I have not replied

u n t i l now, as I wished to learn something of this " Authors '

League." I am now able to supply from their own o f f i c i a l

stationery a l i s t of their " C o u n c i l , " " E x e c u t i v e B o a r d , " etc.

I beg the reader to witness the numbe r of prof essional " r e d -

bloods," and of writers of the sentimental-suggestive, boudoir-

and-delicious caresses type of novel, who have NO T supporte d

the Dreiser protest. These leadi ng lig hts of A m e r i c a nDemocracy

are banded together presumably for the protection of the rights

o f authors and of literature. M a n y of them have not onlyf a i l e d to suppo rt Dreise r's fearless and unexagg erate d realism,

but cowe ring before the successor to Anthony Comstock of f o u la n d ridiculous memory, the majority of them have combined

together and D I S M I S S E D the former secretary of their society

B E C A U S E he showed himself too active in organizing the

protest against the suppression of Dreiser's book.

O patria mia, vedo le mura e gli archi as usual, and the coward ice

o f a servile democracy, also as usual, and the pusi l lanimity of

America's pop ular writers, also as usual, and the inac tive t im id i t y

o f America's "elder generation of literati," also as usual, and

m y contempt for these national characteristics remains unaltered

—as usual.

I append the l i s t of o ff i c i a l s and have starred those who have

signed the protest : seventeen out of a c o u n c i l of sixty.E Z R A P O U N D

January 22, 1917.

T H E A U T H O R S ' L E A G U EO F A M E R I C A ( I N C . )

3 3 W E S T 4 2 N D S T R E E T , N E W Y O R K

President Vice-President.

* W I N S T O N C H U R C H I L L T H E O D O R E R O O S E V E L T

Honorary Vice-PresidentsJ O H N B U R R O U G H S H A M L I N G A R L A N D

R E G I N A L D D E K O V E N B R A N D E R M A T T H E W S

M A R Y E . W n . K i N S F R E E M A N A U G U S T U S T H O M A S

Council

• S A M U E L H O P K I N S A D A M S M A R G A R E T M A Y O

• G E O R G E A D E G E O R G E B A R R M C C U T C H E O N• G E R T R U D E A T H E R T O N • S A M U E L M E R W I N

G E O R G E B A R R B A K E R • G E O R G E M I D D L E T O NR E X B E A C H C L E V E L A N D M O F F E T T

• T H O M PS O N B U C H A N A N • M E R E D I T H N I C H O L S O NE L L I S P A R K E R B U T L E R • H A R V E YO ' H I G G I N S

• W I N S T O N C H U R C H I L L W I L L I A MH . O S B O R N EE D M U N D V A N C E C O O K E • W I L L P A Y N E

G E O R G E C R E E L C H A N N I N G P O L L O C K

J A M E S O L I V E R C U R W O O D M A R YR O B E R T S R I N E H A R TW A L T E R P . E A T O N E D W I N M I L T O N R O Y L E

H A M L I N G A R L A N D R O B E R T H A V E N S C H A U F F L E RD A N A G A T L I N L E R O YS C O T TW I L L I A M J . G H E N T • U P T O N S I N C L A I R

E L L E N G L A S G O W W I L L I A MM . S L O A N E

R O B E R T G R A N T E . H . S O T H E R NH E N R Y S N Y D E R H A R R I S O N * I D A M . T A R B E L L

• A V E R Y H O P W O O D • B O O T H T A R K I N G T O NE M E R S O N H O U G H A R T H U RC . T R A I N

• R U P E R T H U G H E S L O U I S J O S E P H V A N C EW I L L I R W I N B A Y A R D V E I L L E R

B U R G E S J O H N S O N K A T E J O R D A N V E R M I L Y E

O W E N J O H N S O N F R A N KH . V I Z E T E L L Y

A R T H U R I . K E L L E R C H A R L E S S T O K E S W A Y N E

C H A R L E S R A N N K E N N E D Y S T EW A R T E D W A R DW H I T EB A S I L K I N G R O G E R B . W H I T M A N

P E T E R B . K Y N E • J E S S E L Y N C H W I L L I A M S• J A C K L O N D O N O W E N W I S T E R

P E R C Y M A C K A Y E H E L E NS. W O O D R U F F

Executive CommitteeG E O R G E B A R R B A K E R A R T H U RI. K E L L E R

R E X B E A C H L E R O Y S C O T T

• T H O M P S O N B U C H A N A N L O U I SJ O S E P H V A N C E

E L L I S P A R K E R B U T L E R K A T E J O R D A N V E R M I L Y EG E O R G E C R E E L H E L E NS. W O O D R U F F

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



(Continued from page 20) s e n s a t i o n red, whi le anot her of a different wav elen gth sho uld be acco mpani ed by t h a t of green.N o w wh y ind ee d? The whole meani ng an d purpo r to f science is i n v o l v e d in the answer.

(20) W h a t is it t h a t science does? It watchesthi ngs hap pen i n order to enable i t s e l f to say W H E N

t h e y h a p p e n . T h e e l u c i d a t i o n o f t h e " w h e n " o feven ts is the whol e busine ss of scienc e. It seeks tok n o w under jus t what conditions assembled specificevents tak e place . Th at i s : the business of sciencei n any g iven case is to take note on an event 's concomitan ts . I t s mot ive in doin g so i s obviou s . Th ea m b i t i o n of science is to be abl e to issue gua ran tee drecipes for repr oduc ing a l l events whatsoever. I t sen t i re a t t i tude i s con s t ruc t iv e ; i t seeks to d o ; i treproduces by reassembling t h e i n v a r i a b l y c o n c o m i t a n tcondi t ions o f a n y e v e n t : w h i c h same c o n c o m i t a n t si t calls the eve nt' s cause. Thus the process of scienceconsist of two s t a g e s : (1) of des crip tive assert ionss a y i n g what events occur, g i v i n g all the concomitant

condi t ions whenever the y occur, an d (2) of desc ript iveassertions of the same event under var y i ng condi t ion sg i v i n g only such concomitants as inva r i ab l y recuru n d e r all condi t ion s . Wh e n sc ience has de l iveredi t s e l f of this last description i t holds t h a t it hasfurnished the event 's cause ; and i t w o u l d c l a i mt h a t by reassembling just those condi t ions the eventcould moreover be made and remade again at w i l l .T h e first stage might be ca l led t h a t of descr ip t ion ,and the second s tage t h e e x p l a n a t o r y ; b u t o b v i o u s l y,at root, both stages are descriptive equally and solely.E x p l a n a t i o n i s de ta i led and compared descr ip t ion .It is desc ript ion ve ry careful ly done. S o : for science,th ings happen—thus and thus—wh ereupo n sc ience

obed ient ly recites how . Science accepts happenings .I t asks noth ing and gets to know nothing as to whythe y hap pen . Obedie nce an d acce pta tio n of theinexorablene ss of events is science's whole att i tu de.I n t h a t way, and in t h a t way only does it find i t canb r i n g the m to te rm s; for science apprehend s t h a tw h i l e the y are inex orab le, the y are pl ia nt an d manageable w i t h i n the l i m i t s of thei r inexo rableness.

(21) L e t us reci te some of the s impl est assert ionsscience make s. It says, for inst ance , t h a t e v e r ypart icle of mat ter in the univer se a t t r a c t s every otherpar t ic le w i t h a force of fixed potent ia l i t ies for a l lg i v e n cases. I t says t h a t t w o gases, H and O,combine under cer ta in condi t ion s an d in cer ta inprop orti ons as water . I t says t h a t l iqu ids becomegases under definite condi tions . I t tel ls tales of magi cl i k e t h i s : " R u b a g la ss r o d w i t h a s i l k handkerchief .T h e r o d w i l l then have power to a t t r a c t a p i t h - b a l l .T h e handkerchief w i l l h a v e l i k e w i s e . B u t once letthe rod touch the b a l l an d lo an d beh old, the han dkerch ie f w i l l repel t he p i t h - b a l l ! " O r i t w i l l sa yt h a t if the ti ps of tw o ca rb on penc ils to w h i c h ar ea t tac hed wires charged respec t ive ly w i t h negat ivean d posi t iv e electri c currents are brou ght almo stto get he r a br ig ht flame w i l l es tab l i sh i t s e l f betweenthem . Or i t w i l l sa y t h a t i f you br ing a s m a l l q u a nt i t y of gunpow der in to contac t w i t h a t i ny spark ,y o u w i l l get an explos i on d ispro por t io na te ly la rgec o m p a r e d w i t h either of the m. A n d so on, an d soo n . Le t the tale be simp le or comp lex , most co mm onplace- seeming or the most recon dite magic, the basicchar acte ris t ic of ever y inst ance is the same. A l l areassert ions as to wh en thin gs happ en. Ne ve r aret h e y s t a t e m e n t s e x p l a i n i n g why th ings happen.

I f wh en science has pushe d i ts observ ations deepera n d deeper a nd is able to gi ve an acco unt of t hewhen o n a l e v e l w h i c h grows corr espo ndin gly wid e asi t grows deep, the when of a more superficial happeningma y . for conven ienc e in reference be regard ed as ac o r o l l a r y of the wider genera l iza t ion . B u t t h a t ismer ely a mat te r of eco nomy of s t a t emen t and enume

rat ion . I t does not mea n t h a t the superficial happ e n i n g is caused by the more compr ehen sive ly stat ed

happ eni ng in the sense that the latter affords areason wh y the forme r hap pens.

Wh a t science calls a law is merel y a compe ndiou sw a y of gr oup in g a vast num ber of s t a t emen t s aboutspecific h a p p e n i n g s u n d e r o ne b i g " g e n e r a l " statement . The asser t ion embo dyi ng what i s ca l led au n i v e r s a l law differs from t h a t embo dyi ng an i so la tedhapp enin g in i t s quan t i ta t ive bear ing o n l y. I n k ind,

both are ident ica l . B o t h are assertions to the when;neither has a shred of bearing on any why.

(22) If our account appea r s doubtful let us returnto our scientif ic instances an d charge into them w i t ha p h a l a n x o f " w h y ' s . " Why do al l part icle s ofm a t t e r a t t r a c t one anoth er? W h y do they notrather fly a p a r t ? W h y do not bodies flee th e e a r t h ?W h y do not H an d O co mbi ne as som eth ing oth ert h a n w a t e r ? W h y s h o u l d l i k e electric poles sopers i s ten t ly repe l? " N o reason in the w o r l d c anbe assigned " w h y they shoul d not bet hin k themselvesa n d attract. W h y do the two opposite currentspassing through the carbon t ips create a flame?W h y do the y not rathe r pl ay a tu ne ? W h y doesnot gunpowder greeted by a spark gracefully dissolveas a dewd rop or a sweetly exc it in g odour ? W h y ,o h wh y? A s the child ren say, " B e c a u s e ; they dobecause they do , and they don ' t because they d o n ' t " :w h i c h being t rans la ted means that the no tio n ofcause has here outs tepped i t s provin ce . The in t rusion here of a why is an abs urd ity . These are notthe circumstances in w h i c h science knows of anywhy. Science knows only of when's, an d if the ter mwhy makes any appearance whatso ever amo ng thecausal connexions investigated by science i t is actuallythe te rm when i t s e l f we ari ng a disguise. Of thewhy used as the author whom we quote uses i t , i n

t he sense of motive or reason, sc ien t i f ic inves t iga t ionreveals not a trace. A n inter estin g chapter i np h i l o s o p h y indeed awaits the w r i t i n g . If the task isund ert ake n by a wri ter of the ol d school, the chapt erthr oug h sheer persistenc y of hab it w i l l appear as' T h e t rue na tu re of caus e." If it is wr it te n b y one

o f the n ew scho ol it w i l l be " T h e funct i on of the t e rmw h y : a d e f i n i t i o n " !

(23) T he i nfer ence we shall dra w herefrom i nreference to psyc ho-p aral lel i sm is obvio us. In the irdesire to remain fa i th fu l to the duali st ic concep tiono f phen omena , philoso phers have been dri ven to tru lydespera te procee dings . Th ey hav e i n the first plac ebeen dr ive n to conceive an d acknowledge such cond itions of concomi tance, correspondence, a nd correl a t i o n betw een ne ur al an d consciou s facts as inthemselves f u l f i l a l l the requirements necessary toestabli sh the rela tions hip of scientif ic cause an deffect ! H a v i n g done so, an d as th eir sole answ er tothe obvious, the y have thereupo n dis tort ed the wholemea nin g of science by dem and ing from it an answerto a species of question w h i c h i t is an absur dit y toa s k ! S t i l l not content w i t h their exploits , some ofth em have added insul t to inj ury an d decla red t h a to w i n g to a nat ive defect inhe rin g i n the hu ma nin te l lec t , a r iddl e has been pro pou nde d too su btlef o r sol utio n whi le consciousness last s! I n ouropin ion , however, t he r e is a ver y mu ch shorter wayw i t h riddles of this description.

P O È M E SPar ANDR É S P I R E

Author of "Versets," "Vers les Routes Absurdes," etc.

A little book of unpublished poems written justbefore and during the war. M. Spire has beenin Nancy, near the firing-line, since August 1914

PUBLISHED BY THE EGOISTP R I C E 6d N E T P O S T A G E1d

7/27/2019 Egoist 42



P O E T S ' T R A N S L AT I O N SERIES1. (Ready) The complete poems (25) of Anyte of Tegea, now

brought together in English for the first time: translated byRichard Aldington. (8 pages) 2d. net (3d. post free).

2. (Ready) An entirely new version of the poems and newfragments, together with the more important of the old fragments, of Sappho: translated by Edward Storer. (12 pages)4d. net (5d. post free).

3. (Ready) Choruses from the " Iphtgenia in Aulis " ofEuripides : translated by H. D. 6d. net (7d. post free).

4. (Ready) A choice of the Latin poetry of the Italian Renaissance, many now translated for the first time, by Richard Aldington. 4d. net (5d. post free).

5. (Ready) The Poems of Leonidas of Tarentum, now collected—and many translated for the first time in English—by JamesWhitall. 6d. net (7d. post free).

6. (Ready) The "Mose ll a " of Ausonius, translated by F. S.Flint. 6d. net (7d. post free).

A l l the pamphlets—except the first—are twelve to twenty-eight pages long and cost 4d. or 6d. net ; sd. or 7d. post free.The series of six 2s. net post free.

To be obtained from : The Egoist, Oakley House, Bloomsbury Street, W.C.

The Second Series is unavoidably postponed.

EDITORIALLet t e r s , etc. , i n t e n d e d for the E d i t o r of T H E

E G O I S T should be addressed to O a k l e y H o u s e ,Bloomsbury Street , London , W . C .

TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION.Y e a r l y , 6/6 ; U . S . A . $1.60.S i x months , 3/3 ; U . S . A . $ .80.Three months, 1/9 ; U . S . A . $ .40.Si ng l e copies 7d . , post free to al l countries.Cheques, postal a n d money orders, etc., shouldbe p a y a b l e t o T H E E G O I S T , L I M I T E D , and crossed

" P a r r ' s B a n k , B l o om s b u r y B r a n c h . "ADVERTISEMENT RATES.

P e r page £4. Quarter page £1 Is. Od. P e ri n c h s ingle column, 4s. H a l f rates after firsti n se r t i on . A U adver t isements mus t be prepa id .

ORDER FORM

A P O R T R A I T O F T H E

A R T I S T AS A Y O U N GM A NPUBLISHED P R I C E , 6s. (5s. net, postage 4d.

Please send me cop of

A P O R T R A I T O F T H E A R T I S T A S A Y O U N G

M A N , by J A M E S J O Y C E , published by T H E

E G O I S T L T D . , for which I enclose

Name

Address

O R D E R S , A C C O M P A N I E D B Y R E M I T T A N C E , S H O U L D B E

S E N T T O

T H E E G O I S T , L I M I T E D ,

O A K L E Y H O U S E , B L O O M S B U R YS T . , L O N D O N ,W . C .

T h e Little ReviewL I T E R A T U R E ,D R A M A , M U S I C , A R T

M A R G A R E T C. ANDERSON, Editor

The new monthly that has been called " the most uniquejournal in existence."

T H E L I T T L E R E V I E W is a magazine that believesin Life for Art's sake, in the I ndividua l rather than inIncomplete People , in an Age of Imagination rather thanof Reasonableness ; a magazine interested in Past,Present, and Future, but particularly in the N e wHellenism ; a magazine written for Intelligent Peoplewho can Feel, whose philosophy is Applied Anarchism,

whose policy is a Will to Splendour of Life, and whosefunction is—to express itself.

One Year, U.S.A., $1.50 ; Canada, $1.65 ;

Great Britain, 7/-

THE LITTLE REVIEW917 Fine Arts Building, Chicago, U.S.A.

Enclosed find Se ven Shillings for one year's subscription, beginning

Name

Address

T H EC O N T E M P O R A R YS E R I E SI M A G E S - O L D AN D N EW

By Richar d AldingtonT H E only volume of verse by one of the most importantcontemporary poets.

F I V E MEN AN D P O M P E YBy Stephen Vincent Benet

A S E R I E Sof

dramatic portraits, being momentsin thelives of Sertorius, Luci l lus , Cicero, Caesar, Crassus, and

Pompey, outlining the drama of the Republic's fa l l .

T H E E N G L I S H T O N G U E

By Lewis Worthington SmithW A R poems — a group of inspiring and fiery lyr ics of themodern ballad type.

HORIZONS. By Robert Alden SenbornA F I R S T volume of poems in which many critics seeunmistakable signs of genius.

J U D G M E N T . By Amelia J. BurrP L A Y in one act i n verse, by the author of The RoadsideFire. A poignant tragedy of Salem witchcraft days.

T H E H O M E C O M I N GBy Paul Eldridge

T w o one-act plays of the Great War.

E A C H volume about 5 by 7 inches; printed on heavyantique paper ; bound with coloured wrapper overboards ; covers ornamented with designs. Send forcomplete descriptive catalogue. Price 60 cents each ata l l booksellers. Postage extra. For sale at The PoetryBookshop, London.

T H E F O U R S E A S C O M P A N Y , P U B L I S H E R S

C o r n h i l l , Boston, U . S . A .

P r i n t e d at T H E C O M P L E T E P R E S S , West Norwood, an d published by the Proprie tors , T H E E G O I S T , L I M I T E D

egoist 42

Documents