The Little Review, May, 1917 (Vol. 4, No. 1)Various
General
The Little Review, May, 1917 (Vol. 4, No. 1)
Various
Literature, Modern -- 20th century -- Periodicals
There was a common motive which led Eeldrop and Appleplex thus to
separate themselves from time to time, from the fields of their daily
employments and their ordinarily social activities. Both were
endeavoring to escape not the commonplace, respectable or even the
domestic, but the too well pigeonholed, too taken-for-granted, too
highly systematized areas, and,—in the language of those whom they
sought to avoid—they wished “to apprehend the human soul in its concrete
individuality.”
“Why,” said Eeldrop, “was that fat Spaniard, who sat at the table with
us this evening, and listened to our conversation with occasional
curiosity, why was he himself for a moment an object of interest to us?
He wore his napkin tucked into his chin, he made unpleasant noises while
eating, and while not eating, his way of crumbling bread between fat
fingers made me extremely nervous: he wore a waistcoat cafe au lait, and
black boots with brown tops. He was oppressively gross and vulgar; he
belonged to a type, he could easily be classified in any town of
provincial Spain. Yet under the circumstances—when we had been
discussing marriage, and he suddenly leaned forward and exclaimed: “I
was married once myself”—we were able to detach him from his
classification and regard him for a moment as an unique being, a soul,
however insignificant, with a history of its own, once for all. It is
these moments which we prize, and which alone are revealing. For any
vital truth is incapable of being applied to another case: the essential
is unique. Perhaps that is why it is so neglected: because it is
useless. What we learned about that Spaniard is incapable of being
applied to any other Spaniard, or even recalled in words. With the
decline of orthodox theology and its admirable theory of the soul, the
unique importance of events has vanished. A man is only important as he
is classed. Hence there is no tragedy, or no appreciation of tragedy,
which is the same thing. We had been talking of young Bistwick, who
three months ago married his mother’s housemaid and now is aware of the
fact. Who appreciates the truth of the matter? Not the relatives, for
they are only moved by affection, by regard for Bistwick’s interests,
and chiefly by their collective feeling of family disgrace. Not the
generous minded and thoughtful outsider, who regards it merely as
evidence for the necessity of divorce law reform. Bistwick is classed
among the unhappily married. But what Bistwick feels when he wakes up in
the morning, which is the great important fact, no detached outsider
conceives. The awful importance of the ruin of a life is overlooked. Men
are only allowed to be happy or miserable in classes. In Gopsum Street a
man murders his mistress. The important fact is that for the man the act
is eternal, and that for the brief space he has to live, he is already
dead. He is already in a different world from ours. He has crossed the
frontier. The important fact that something is done which can not be
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account