"They won't be," said Wilkins, "when all this comes out.... But, anyhow, your whole case, your justification, your thesis is that there is this Mind of the Race, overriding, dominating---- And that you are its Prophet."

"Because a man confesses a belief, Wilkins, that doesn't make him a Prophet. I don't set up--I express."

"Your Mind of the Race theory has an elegance, a plausibility, I admit," said Wilkins.

Dodd's expression indicated that it didn't take him in. He compressed his lips. Not a bit of it.

"But is this in reality true? Is this what exists and goes on? We people who sit in studies and put in whole hours of our days thinking and joining things together do get a kind of coherence into our ideas about the world. Just because there is leisure and time for us to think. But are you sure that is the Race at all? That is my point.

Aren't we intellectually just a by-product? If you went back to the time of Plato, you would say that the idea of his "Republic" was what was going on in the Mind of the Race then. But I object that that was only the futile fancy of a gentleman of leisure. What was really going on was the gathering up of the Macedonian power to smash through Greece, and then make Greece conquer Asia. Your literature and philosophy are really just the private entertainment of old gentlemen out of the hurly-burly and ambitious young men too delicate to hunt or shoot. Thought is nothing in the world until it begins to operate in will and act, and the history of mankind doesn't show now, and it never has shown, any consecutive relation to human thinking. The real Mind of the Race is, I submit, something not literary at all, not consecutive, but like the inconsecutive incoherences of an idiot----"

"No," said Boon, "of a child."

"You have wars, you have great waves of religious excitement, you have patriotic and imperial delusions, you have ill-conceived and surprising economic changes----"

"As if humanity as a whole were a mere creature of chance and instinct," said Boon.

"Exactly," said Wilkins.

"I admit that," said Boon. "But my case is that sanity grows. That what was ceases to be. The mind of reason gets now out of the study into the market-place."

"You mean really, Boon, that the Mind of the Race isn't a mind that _is_, it is just a mind that becomes."

"That's what it's all about," said Boon.

"And that is where I want to take you up," said Wilkins. "I want to suggest that the Mind of the Race may be just a gleam of conscious realization that pa.s.ses from darkness to darkness----"

"_No_," said Boon.

"Why not?"

"Because I will not have it so," said Boon.

-- 2

There can be no denying that from quite an early stage in the discussion Boon was excited and presently on the verge of ill-temper.

This dragging of his will into a question of fact showed, I think, the beginning of his irritation. And he was short and presently rather uncivil in his replies to Wilkins.

Boon argued that behind the individualities and immediacies of life there was in reality a consecutive growth of wisdom, that larger numbers of people and a larger proportion of people than ever before were taking part in the World Mind process, and that presently this would become a great conscious general thinking of the race together.

Wilkins admitted that there had been a number of starts in the direction of impersonal understanding and explanation; indeed, there was something of the sort in every fresh religious beginning; but he argued that these starts do not show a regular progressive movement, and that none of them had ever achieved any real directive and unifying power over their adherents; that only a few Christians had ever grasped Christianity, that Brahminism fell to intellectual powder before it touched the crowd, that nowadays there was less sign than ever of the honest intellectuals getting any hold whatever upon the minds and movements of the popular ma.s.s....

"The Mind of the Race," said Wilkins, "seems at times to me much more like a scared child cowering in the corner of a cage full of apes."

Boon was extraordinarily disconcerted by these contradictions.

"It will grow up," he s.n.a.t.c.hed.

"If the apes let it," said Wilkins. "You can see how completely the thinkers and poets and all this stuff of literature and the study don't represent the real Mind, such as it is, of Humanity, when you note how the ma.s.s of mankind turns naturally to make and dominate its own organs of expression. Take the popular press, take the popular theatre, take popular religion, take current fiction, take the music-hall, watch the development of the cinematograph. There you have the real body of mankind expressing itself. If you are right, these things should fall in a kind of relationship to the intellectual hierarchy. But the intellectual hierarchy goes and hides away in country houses and beautiful retreats and provincial universities and stuffy high-cla.s.s periodicals. It's afraid of the ma.s.s of men, it dislikes and dreads the ma.s.s of men, and it affects a pride and aloofness to cover it. Plato wanted to reorganize social order and the common life; the young man in the twopenny tube was the man he was after. He wanted to exercise him and teach him exactly what to do with the young woman beside him. Instead of which poor Plato has become just an occasion for some Oxford don to bleat about his unapproachable style and wisdom...."

"I admit we're not connected up yet," said Boon.

"You're more disconnected than ever you were. In the Middle Ages there was something like a connected system of ideas in Christendom, so that the Pope and the devout fishwife did in a sense march together...."

You see the wrangling argument on which they were launched.

Boon maintained that there was a spreading thought process, clearly perceptible nowadays, and that those detachments of Wilkins' were not complete. He instanced the cheap editions of broad-thinking books, the variety of articles in the modern newspaper, the signs of wide discussions. Wilkins, on the other hand, a.s.serted a predominant intellectual degeneration.... Moreover, Wilkins declared, with the murmurous approval of Dodd, that much even of the Academic thought process was going wrong, that Bergson's Pragmatism for Ladies was a poor subst.i.tute even for Herbert Spencer, that the boom about "Mendelism" was a triumph of weak thinking over comprehensive ideas.

"Even if we leave the ma.s.ses out of account, it is still rather more than doubtful if there is any secular intellectual growth."

And it is curious to recall now that as an instance of a degenerative thought process among educated people Wilkins instanced modern Germany. Here, he said, in the case of a Mind covering over a hundred million people altogether, was a real retrocession of intellectual freedom. The pretentious expression of instinctive crudity had always been the peculiar weakness of the German mind. It had become more and more manifest, he said, as nationalism had ousted foreign influence.

You see what pretty scope for mutual contradiction there was in all this. "Let me get books," cried Wilkins, "and I will read you samples of the sort of thing that pa.s.ses for thinking in Germany. I will read you some of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, some of Nietzsche's boiling utterance, some of Schopenhauer."

"Let me," said Wilkins, "read a pa.s.sage I have picked almost haphazard from Schopenhauer. One gets Schopenhauer rammed down one's throat as a philosopher, as a deep thinker, as the only alternative to the Hegelian dose. And just listen----"

He began to read in a voice of deliberate malice, letting his voice italicize the more scandalous transitions of what was certainly a very foolish and ill-knit piece of a.s.sertion.

"'Little men have a decided inclination for big women, and _vice versa_; and indeed in a little man the preference for big women will be so much the more pa.s.sionate if he himself was begotten by a big father, and only remains little through the influence of his mother; because he has inherited from his father the vascular system and its energy which was able to supply a large body with blood. If, on the other hand, his father and grandfather were both little, that inclination will make itself less felt. At the foundation of the aversion of a big woman to big men lies _the intention of Nature_ to avoid too big a race.... Further, the consideration as to the complexion is very decided. Blondes prefer dark persons or brunettes; but the latter seldom prefer the former. _The reason is_, that fair hair and blue eyes are in themselves a variation from the type, almost an abnormity, a.n.a.logous to white mice, or at least to grey horses. In no part of the world, not even in the vicinity of the Pole, are they indigenous, except in Europe, and are clearly of Scandinavian origin. I may here express my opinion in pa.s.sing that the white colour of the skin is not natural to man, but that by nature he has a black or brown skin, like _our forefathers the Hindus_; that consequently a white man has never originally sprung from the womb of Nature, and that thus there is no such thing as a white race, much as this is talked of, but every white man is a faded or bleached one. Forced into this strange world, where he only exists like an exotic plant, and like this requires in winter the hothouse, in the course of thousands of years man became white. The gipsies, an Indian race which immigrated only about four centuries ago, show the transition from the complexion of the Hindu to our own.

_Therefore_ in s.e.xual love Nature strives to return to dark hair and brown eyes as the primitive type; but the white colour of the skin has become second nature, though not so that the brown of the Hindu repels us. Finally, each one also seeks in the particular parts of the body the corrective of his own defects and aberrations, and does so the more decidedly the more important the part is. _Therefore_ snub-nosed individuals have an inexpressible liking for hook-noses, parrot-faces; and it is the same with regard to all other parts. Men with excessively slim, long bodies and limbs can find beauty in a body which is even beyond measure stumpy and short.... Whoever is himself in some respects very perfect does not indeed seek and love imperfection in this respect, but is yet more easily reconciled to it than others; because he himself insures the children against great imperfection of this part. For example, whoever is himself very white will not object to a yellow complexion; but whoever has the latter will find dazzling whiteness divinely beautiful.' (You will note that he perceives he has practically contradicted this a few lines before, and that evidently he has gone back and stuck in that saving clause about a white skin being second nature.) 'The rare case in which a man falls in love with a decidedly ugly woman occurs when, beside the exact harmony of the degree of s.e.x explained above, the whole of her abnormities are precisely the opposite, and thus the corrective, of his. The love is then wont to reach a high degree....'

"And so on and so on," said Wilkins. "Just a foolish, irresponsible saying of things. And all this stuff, this celibate cerebration, you must remember, is not even fresh; it was said far more funnily and pleasantly by old Campanella in his 'City of the Sun.' And, mind you, this isn't a side issue Schopenhauer is upon; it isn't a moment of relaxation; this argument is essential to the whole argument of his philosophy...."

"But after all," said Boon, "Schopenhauer is hardly to be considered a modern. He was pre-Darwinian."

"Exactly why I begin with him," said Wilkins. "He was a contemporary of Darwin, and it was while Darwin was patiently and industriously building up evidence, that this nonsense, a whole torrent of it, a complete doctrine about the Will to Live, was being poured out. But what I want you to notice is that while the sort of cautious ma.s.sing of evidence, the close reasoning, the honesty and veracity, that distinguished the method of Darwin and Huxley, are scarcely to be met with anywhere to-day, this spouting style of doing things is everywhere. Take any of the stuff of that intellectual jackdaw, Bernard Shaw, and you will find the Schopenhauer method in full development; caught-up ideas, glib, irrational transitions, wild a.s.sertions about the Life Force, about the effects of alcohol, about 'fear-poisoned' meat, about medical science, about economic processes, about Russia, about the Irish temperament and the English intelligence, about the thoughts and mental processes of everybody and every sort of mind, stuff too incoherent and recklessly positive ever to be systematically answered. And yet half at least of the English-speaking intelligenzia regards Shaw as a part of the thought process of the world. Schopenhauer was a pioneer in the game of impudent a.s.sertion, very properly disregarded by his own generation; Shaw's dementia samples this age. You see my case? In any rationally trained, clear-headed period Shaw would have been looked into, dissected, and disposed of long ago.... And here I have two other of the voices that this time respects. It is all my argument that they are respected now enormously, Boon; not merely that they exist. Men to talk and write foolishly, to make groundless positive statements and to misapprehend an opponent there have always been, but this age now tolerates and accepts them. Here is that invalid Englishman, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, who found a more congenial, intellectual atmosphere in Germany, and this is his great book, 'The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century.' This book has been received with the utmost solemnity in the highest quarters; nowhere has it been handed over to the derision which is its only proper treatment. You remember a rather readable and rather pretentious history we had in our schooldays, full of bad ethnology about Kelts and Anglo-Saxons, called J. R. Green's 'History of the English People'; it was part of that movement of professorial barbarity, of braggart race-Imperialism and anti-Irishism, of which Froude and Freeman were leaders; it smelt of Carlyle and Germany, it helped provoke the Keltic Renascence. Well, that was evidently, the germ of Herr Chamberlain. Here----"

Wilkins turned over the pages.

"Here he is, in fairly good form. It is a section called 'The Turning Point,' and it's quite on all fours with Schopenhauer's 'our ancestors the Hindus.' It is part of a sketch in outline of the history of the past. 'The important thing,' he says, is to 'fix the turning-point of the history of Europe.' While he was at it he might just as well have _fixed_ the equator of the history of Europe and its sparking-plug and the position of its liver. Now, listen--

"'The awakening of the Teutonic peoples to the consciousness of their all-important vocation as the founders of a completely new civilization and culture marks the turning-point; the year 1200 can be designated the central moment of this awakening.'

"Just consider that. He does not even trouble to remind us of the very considerable literature that must exist, of course, as evidence of that awakening. He just flings the statement out, knowing that his sort of follower swallows all such statements blind, and then, possibly with some qualms of doubt about what may have been happening in Spain and Italy and India and China and j.a.pan, he goes on--

"'Scarcely any one will have the hardihood to deny that the inhabitants of Northern Europe have become the makers of the world's history. At no time have they stood alone ... others, too, have exercised influence--indeed great influence--upon the destinies of mankind, but then _always merely as opponents of the men from the north_....'

"Poor Jenghiz Khan, who had founded the Mogul Empire in India just about that time, and was to lay the foundations of the Yuen dynasty, and prepare the way for the great days of the Mings, never knew how _mere_ his relations were with these marvellous 'men from the north.'

The Tartars, it is true, were sacking Moscow somewhere about twelve hundred.... But let us get on to more of the recital of Teutonic glories.

"'If, however, the Teutons were not the only people who moulded the world's history' (generous admission) 'they unquestionably' (that _unquestionably_!) 'deserve the first place; all those who appear as genuine shapers of the destinies of mankind, whether as builders of States or as discoverers of new thoughts and of original art' (oh j.a.pan! oh Ming dynasty! oh art and life of India!) 'belong to the Teutonic race. The impulse given by the Arabs is short lived'

(astronomy, chemistry, mathematics, modern science generally!); 'the Mongolians destroy but do not create anything' (Samarkand, Delhi, Pekin); 'the great Italians of the _rinascimento_ were _all_ born either in the north, saturated with Lombardic, Gothic, and Frankish blood, or in the extreme Germano-h.e.l.lenic south; in Spain it was the Western Goths who formed the element of life; the Jews are working out their "Renaissance" of to-day by following in every sphere as closely as possible the example of the Teutonic peoples.'

"That dodge of claiming all the great figures of the non-Teutonic nations as Teutons is carried out to magnificent extremes. Dante is a Teuton on the strength of his profile and his surname, and there is some fine play about the race of Christ. He came from Galilee, notoriously non-Jewish, and so on; but Lord Redesdale, who writes a sympathetic Introduction, sets the seal on the Teutonic nationality of Christ by reminding us that Joseph was only the putative father....

"It makes a born Teuton like myself feel his divinity," said Wilkins, and read, browsing: "'From the moment the Teuton awakes a new world begins to open out----' Um! Um!... Oh, here we are again!--

"'It is equally untrue that our culture is a renaissance of the h.e.l.lenic and the Roman; it was only after the birth of the Teutonic peoples that the renaissance of past achievements was possible and not _vice versa_.'... I wonder what exactly _vice versa_ means there!... 'The mightiest creators of that epoch--a Shakespeare, a Michael Angelo--_do not know a word of Greek or Latin_.'