Touch and Go: A Play in Three ActsLawrence, D. H. (David Herbert)
General
Touch and Go: A Play in Three Acts
Lawrence, D. H. (David Herbert)
English drama
How many tragic situations did Goethe say were possible? Something like
thirty-two. Which seems a lot. Anyhow, granted that men are men still,
that not all of them are bits, parts, machine-sections, then we have
added another tragic possibility to the list: the Strike situation. As
yet no one tackles this situation. It is a sort of Medusa head, which
turns--no, not to stone, but to sloppy treacle. Mr. Galsworthy had a
peep, and sank down towards bathos.
Granted that men are still men, Labour _v_. Capitalism is a tragic
struggle. If men are no more than implements, it is non-tragic and
merely disastrous. In tragedy the man is more than his part. Hamlet is
more than Prince of Denmark, Macbeth is more than murderer of Duncan.
The man is caught in the wheels of his part, his fate, he may be torn
asunder. He may be killed, but the resistant, integral soul in him is
not destroyed. He comes through, though he dies. He goes through with
his fate, though death swallows him. And it is in this facing of fate,
this going right through with it, that tragedy lies. Tragedy is not
disaster. It is a disaster when a cart-wheel goes over a frog, but it is
not a tragedy, not the hugest; not the death of ten million men. It is
only a cartwheel going over a frog. There must be a supreme STRUGGLE.
In Shakespeare's time it was the people _versus_ king storm that was
brewing. Majesty was about to have its head off. Come what might, Hamlet
and Macbeth and Goneril and Regan had to see the business through.
Now a new wind is getting up. We call it Labour _versus_ Capitalism. We
say it is a mere material struggle, a money-grabbing affair. But this
is only one aspect of it. In so far as men are merely mechanical,
the struggle is one which, though it may bring disaster and death to
millions, is no more than accident, an accidental collision of forces.
But in so far as men are men, the situation is tragic. It is not really
the bone we are fighting for. We are fighting to have somebody's head
off. The conflict is in pure, passional antagonism, turning upon the
poles of belief. Majesty was only _hors d'oevres_ to this tragic repast.
So, the strike situation has this dual aspect. First it is a
mechanico-material struggle, two mechanical forces pulling asunder
from the central object, the bone. All it can result in is the pulling
asunder of the fabric of civilisation, and even of life, without any
creative issue. It is no more than a frog under a cart-wheel. The
mechanical forces, rolling on, roll over the body of life and squash it.
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