,transcribed from the #aiji ,arthur ,l4 ,humphreys edition by ,david ,price1 email ccx#jgdpglaf4org ,picture3 ,book cover ,,the ,,soul ,,of ,,man 99 99 99 99 99 ,,london ,,arthur ,l4 ,,humpreys #aijj 99 99 99 99 99 ,second ,impression ,,the ,,soul ,,of ,,man ,,the chief advantage that would result from the establishment of ,socialism is1 undoubtedly1 the fact that ,socialism would relieve us from that sordid necessity of living for others which1 in the present condition of things1 presses so hardly upon almost everybody4 ,in fact1 scarcely anyone at all escapes4 ,now and then1 in the course of the century1 a great man of science1 like ,darwin2 a great poet1 like ,keats2 a fine critical spirit1 like ,m4 ,renan2 a supreme artist1 like ,flaubert1 has been able to isolate himself1 to keep himself out of reach of the clamorous claims of others1 to stand #8under the shelter of the wall1' as ,plato puts it1 and so to realise the perfection of what was in him1 to his own incomparable gain1 and to the incomparable and lasting gain of the whole world4 ,these1 however1 are exceptions4 ,the majority of people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism--are forced1 indeed1 so to spoil them4 ,they find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty1 by hideous ugliness1 by hideous starvation4 ,it is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this4 ,the emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man's intelligence2 and1 as ,i pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism1 it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought4 ,accordingly1 with admirable1 though misdirected intentions1 they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see4 ,but their remedies do not cure the disease3 they merely prolong it4 ,indeed1 their remedies are part of the disease4 ,they try to solve the problem of poverty1 for instance1 by keeping the poor alive2 or1 in the case of a very advanced school1 by amusing the poor4 ,but this is not a solution3 it is an aggravation of the difficulty4 ,the proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible4 ,and the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim4 ,just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves1 and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it1 and understood by those who contemplated it1 so1 in the present state of things in ,england1 the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good2 and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life--educated men who live in the ,east ,end--coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity1 benevolence1 and the like4 ,they do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises4 ,they are perfectly right4 ,charity creates a multitude of sins4 ,there is also this to be said4 ,it is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property4 ,it is both immoral and unfair4 ,under ,socialism all this will1 of course1 be altered4 ,there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags1 and bringing up unhealthy1 hunger-pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings4 ,the security of society will not depend1 as it does now1 on the state of the weather4 ,if a frost comes we shall not have a hundred thousand men out of work1 tramping about the streets in a state of disgusting misery1 or whining to their neighbours for alms1 or crowding round the doors of loathsome shelters to try and secure a hunch of bread and a night's unclean lodging4 ,each member of the society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society1 and if a frost comes no one will practically be anything the worse4 ,upon the other hand1 ,socialism itself will be of value simply because it will lead to ,individualism4 ,socialism1 ,communism1 or whatever one chooses to call it1 by converting private property into public wealth1 and substituting co-operation for competition1 will restore society to its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism1 and insure the material well-being of each member of the community4 ,it will1 in fact1 give ,life its proper basis and its proper environment4 ,but for the full development of ,life to its highest mode of perfection1 something more is needed4 ,what is needed is ,individualism4 ,if the ,socialism is ,authoritarian2 if there are ,governments armed with economic power as they are now with political power2 if1 in a word1 we are to have ,industrial ,tyrannies1 then the last state of man will be worse than the first4 ,at present1 in consequence of the existence of private property1 a great many people are enabled to develop a certain very limited amount of ,individualism4 ,they are either under no necessity to work for their living1 or are enabled to choose the sphere of activity that is really congenial to them1 and gives them pleasure4 ,these are the poets1 the philosophers1 the men of science1 the men of culture--in a word1 the real men1 the men who have realised themselves1 and in whom all ,humanity gains a partial realisation4 ,upon the other hand1 there are a great many people who1 having no private property of their own1 and being always on the brink of sheer starvation1 are compelled to do the work of beasts of burden1 to do work that is quite uncongenial to them1 and to which they are forced by the peremptory1 unreasonable1 degrading ,tyranny of want4 ,these are the poor1 and amongst them there is no grace of manner1 or charm of speech1 or civilisation1 or culture1 or refinement in pleasures1 or joy of life4 ,from their collective force ,humanity gains much in material prosperity4 ,but it is only the material result that it gains1 and the man who is poor is in himself absolutely of no importance4 ,he is merely the infinitesimal atom of a force that1 so far from regarding him1 crushes him3 indeed1 prefers him crushed1 as in that case he is far more obedient4 ,of course1 it might be said that the ,individualism generated under conditions of private property is not always1 or even as a rule1 of a fine or wonderful type1 and that the poor1 if they have not culture and charm1 have still many virtues4 ,both these statements would be quite true4 ,the possession of private property is very often extremely demoralising1 and that is1 of course1 one of the reasons why ,socialism wants to get rid of the institution4 ,in fact1 property is really a nuisance4 ,some years ago people went about the country saying that property has duties4 ,they said it so often and so tediously that1 at last1 the ,church has begun to say it4 ,one hears it now from every pulpit4 ,it is perfectly true4 ,property not merely has duties1 but has so many duties that its possession to any large extent is a bore4 ,it involves endless claims upon one1 endless attention to business1 endless bother4 ,if property had simply pleasures1 we could stand it2 but its duties make it unbearable4 ,in the interest of the rich we must get rid of it4 ,the virtues of the poor may be readily admitted1 and are much to be regretted4 ,we are often told that the poor are grateful for charity4 ,some of them are1 no doubt1 but the best amongst the poor are never grateful4 ,they are ungrateful1 discontented1 disobedient1 and rebellious4 ,they are quite right to be so4 ,charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution1 or a sentimental dole1 usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives4 ,why should they be grateful for the crumbs that fall from the rich man's table8 ,they should be seated at the board1 and are beginning to know it4 ,as for being discontented1 a man who would not be discontented with such surroundings and such a low mode of life would be a perfect brute4 ,disobedience1 in the eyes of anyone who has read history1 is man's original virtue4 ,it is through disobedience that progress has been made1 through disobedience and through rebellion4 ,sometimes the poor are praised for being thrifty4 ,but to recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting4 ,it is like advising a man who is starving to eat less4 ,for a town or country labourer to practise thrift would be absolutely immoral4 ,man should not be ready to show that he can live like a badly-fed animal4 ,he should decline to live like that1 and should either steal or go on the rates1 which is considered by many to be a form of stealing4 ,as for begging1 it is safer to beg than to take1 but it is finer to take than to beg4 ,no3 a poor man who is ungrateful1 unthrifty1 discontented1 and rebellious1 is probably a real personality1 and has much in him4 ,he is at any rate a healthy protest4 ,as for the virtuous poor1 one can pity them1 of course1 but one cannot possibly admire them4 ,they have made private terms with the enemy1 and sold their birthright for very bad pottage4 ,they must also be extraordinarily stupid4 ,i can quite understand a man accepting laws that protect private property1 and admit of its accumulation1 as long as he himself is able under those conditions to realise some form of beautiful and intellectual life4 ,but it is almost incredible to me how a man whose life is marred and made hideous by such laws can possibly acquiesce in their continuance4 ,however1 the explanation is not really difficult to find4 ,it is simply this4 ,misery and poverty are so absolutely degrading1 and exercise such a paralysing effect over the nature of men1 that no class is ever really conscious of its own suffering4 ,they have to be told of it by other people1 and they often entirely disbelieve them4 ,what is said by great employers of labour against agitators is unquestionably true4 ,agitators are a set of interfering1 meddling people1 who come down to some perfectly contented class of the community1 and sow the seeds of discontent amongst them4 ,that is the reason why agitators are so absolutely necessary4 ,without them1 in our incomplete state1 there would be no advance towards civilisation4 ,slavery was put down in ,america1 not in consequence of any action on the part of the slaves1 or even any express desire on their part that they should be free4 ,it was put down entirely through the grossly illegal conduct of certain agitators in ,boston and elsewhere1 who were not slaves themselves1 nor owners of slaves1 nor had anything to do with the question really4 ,it was1 undoubtedly1 the ,abolitionists who set the torch alight1 who began the whole thing4 ,and it is curious to note that from the slaves themselves they received1 not merely very little assistance1 but hardly any sympathy even2 and when at the close of the war the slaves found themselves free1 found themselves indeed so absolutely free that they were free to starve1 many of them bitterly regretted the new state of things4 ,to the thinker1 the most tragic fact in the whole of the ,french ,revolution is not that ,marie ,antoinette was killed for being a queen1 but that the starved peasant of the ,vende voluntarily went out to die for the hideous cause of feudalism4 ,it is clear1 then1 that no ,authoritarian ,socialism will do4 ,for while under the present system a very large number of people can lead lives of a certain amount of freedom and expression and happiness1 under an industrial-barrack system1 or a system of economic tyranny1 nobody would be able to have any such freedom at all4 ,it is to be regretted that a portion of our community should be practically in slavery1 but to propose to solve the problem by enslaving the entire community is childish4 ,every man must be left quite free to choose his own work4 ,no form of compulsion must be exercised over him4 ,if there is1 his work will not be good for him1 will not be good in itself1 and will not be good for others4 ,and by work ,i simply mean activity of any kind4 ,i hardly think that any ,socialist1 nowadays1 would seriously propose that an inspector should call every morning at each house to see that each citizen rose up and did manual labour for eight hours4 ,humanity has got beyond that stage1 and reserves such a form of life for the people whom1 in a very arbitrary manner1 it chooses to call criminals4 ,but ,i confess that many of the socialistic views that ,i have come across seem to me to be tainted with ideas of authority1 if not of actual compulsion4 ,of course1 authority and compulsion are out of the question4 ,all association must be quite voluntary4 ,it is only in voluntary associations that man is fine4 ,but it may be asked how ,individualism1 which is now more or less dependent on the existence of private property for its development1 will benefit by the abolition of such private property4 ,the answer is very simple4 ,it is true that1 under existing conditions1 a few men who have had private means of their own1 such as ,byron1 ,shelley1 ,browning1 ,victor ,hugo1 ,baudelaire1 and others1 have been able to realise their personality more or less completely4 ,not one of these men ever did a single day's work for hire4 ,they were relieved from poverty4 ,they had an immense advantage4 ,the question is whether it would be for the good of ,individualism that such an advantage should be taken away4 ,let us suppose that it is taken away4 ,what happens then to ,individualism8 ,how will it benefit8 ,it will benefit in this way4 ,under the new conditions ,individualism will be far freer1 far finer1 and far more intensified than it is now4 ,i am not talking of the great imaginatively-realised ,individualism of such poets as ,i have mentioned1 but of the great actual ,individualism latent and potential in mankind generally4 ,for the recognition of private property has really harmed ,individualism1 and obscured it1 by confusing a man with what he possesses4 ,it has led ,individualism entirely astray4 ,it has made gain not growth its aim4 ,so that man thought that the important thing was to have1 and did not know that the important thing is to be4 ,the true perfection of man lies1 not in what man has1 but in what man is4 ,private property has crushed true ,individualism1 and set up an ,individualism that is false4 ,it has debarred one part of the community from being individual by starving them4 ,it has debarred the other part of the community from being individual by putting them on the wrong road1 and encumbering them4 ,indeed1 so completely has man's personality been absorbed by his possessions that the ,english law has always treated offences against a man's property with far more severity than offences against his person1 and property is still the test of complete citizenship4 ,the industry necessary for the making money is also very demoralising4 ,in a community like ours1 where property confers immense distinction1 social position1 honour1 respect1 titles1 and other pleasant things of the kind1 man1 being naturally ambitious1 makes it his aim to accumulate this property1 and goes on wearily and tediously accumulating it long after he has got far more than he wants1 or can use1 or enjoy1 or perhaps even know of4 ,man will kill himself by overwork in order to secure property1 and really1 considering the enormous advantages that property brings1 one is hardly surprised4 ,one's regret is that society should be constructed on such a basis that man has been forced into a groove in which he cannot freely develop what is wonderful1 and fascinating1 and delightful in him--in which1 in fact1 he misses the true pleasure and joy of living4 ,he is also1 under existing conditions1 very insecure4 ,an enormously wealthy merchant may be--often is--at every moment of his life at the mercy of things that are not under his control4 ,if the wind blows an extra point or so1 or the weather suddenly changes1 or some trivial thing happens1 his ship may go down1 his speculations may go wrong1 and he finds himself a poor man1 with his social position quite gone4 ,now1 nothing should be able to harm a man except himself4 ,nothing should be able to rob a man at all4 ,what a man really has1 is what is in him4 ,what is outside of him should be a matter of no importance4 ,with the abolition of private property1 then1 we shall have true1 beautiful1 healthy ,individualism4 ,nobody will waste his life in accumulating things1 and the symbols for things4 ,one will live4 ,to live is the rarest thing in the world4 ,most people exist1 that is all4 ,it is a question whether we have ever seen the full expression of a personality1 except on the imaginative plane of art4 ,in action1 we never have4 ,csar1 says ,mommsen1 was the complete and perfect man4 ,but how tragically insecure was ,csar6 ,wherever there is a man who exercises authority1 there is a man who resists authority4 ,csar was very perfect1 but his perfection travelled by too dangerous a road4 ,marcus ,aurelius was the perfect man1 says ,renan4 ,yes2 the great emperor was a perfect man4 ,but how intolerable were the endless claims upon him6 ,he staggered under the burden of the empire4 ,he was conscious how inadequate one man was to bear the weight of that ,titan and too vast orb4 ,what ,i mean by a perfect man is one who develops under perfect conditions2 one who is not wounded1 or worried or maimed1 or in danger4 ,most personalities have been obliged to be rebels4 ,half their strength has been wasted in friction4 ,byron's personality1 for instance1 was terribly wasted in its battle with the stupidity1 and hypocrisy1 and ,philistinism of the ,english4 ,such battles do not always intensify strength3 they often exaggerate weakness4 ,byron was never able to give us what he might have given us4 ,shelley escaped better4 ,like ,byron1 he got out of ,england as soon as possible4 ,but he was not so well known4 ,if the ,english had had any idea of what a great poet he really was1 they would have fallen on him with tooth and nail1 and made his life as unbearable to him as they possibly could4 ,but he was not a remarkable figure in society1 and consequently he escaped1 to a certain degree4 ,still1 even in ,shelley the note of rebellion is sometimes too strong4 ,the note of the perfect personality is not rebellion1 but peace4 ,it will be a marvellous thing--the true personality of man--when we see it4 ,it will grow naturally and simply1 flowerlike1 or as a tree grows4 ,it will not be at discord4 ,it will never argue or dispute4 ,it will not prove things4 ,it will know everything4 ,and yet it will not busy itself about knowledge4 ,it will have wisdom4 ,its value will not be measured by material things4 ,it will have nothing4 ,and yet it will have everything1 and whatever one takes from it1 it will still have1 so rich will it be4 ,it will not be always meddling with others1 or asking them to be like itself4 ,it will love them because they will be different4 ,and yet while it will not meddle with others1 it will help all1 as a beautiful thing helps us1 by being what it is4 ,the personality of man will be very wonderful4 ,it will be as wonderful as the personality of a child4 ,in its development it will be assisted by ,christianity1 if men desire that2 but if men do not desire that1 it will develop none the less surely4 ,for it will not worry itself about the past1 nor care whether things happened or did not happen4 ,nor will it admit any laws but its own laws2 nor any authority but its own authority4 ,yet it will love those who sought to intensify it1 and speak often of them4 ,and of these ,christ was one4 #8,know thyself' was written over the portal of the antique world4 ,over the portal of the new world1 #8,be thyself' shall be written4 ,and the message of ,christ to man was simply #8,be thyself4' ,that is the secret of ,christ4 ,when ,jesus talks about the poor he simply means personalities1 just as when he talks about the rich he simply means people who have not developed their personalities4 ,jesus moved in a community that allowed the accumulation of private property just as ours does1 and the gospel that he preached was not that in such a community it is an advantage for a man to live on scanty1 unwholesome food1 to wear ragged1 unwholesome clothes1 to sleep in horrid1 unwholesome dwellings1 and a disadvantage for a man to live under healthy1 pleasant1 and decent conditions4 ,such a view would have been wrong there and then1 and would1 of course1 be still more wrong now and in ,england2 for as man moves northward the material necessities of life become of more vital importance1 and our society is infinitely more complex1 and displays far greater extremes of luxury and pauperism than any society of the antique world4 ,what ,jesus meant1 was this4 ,he said to man1 #8,you have a wonderful personality4 ,develop it4 ,be yourself4 ,don't imagine that your perfection lies in accumulating or possessing external things4 ,your affection is inside of you4 ,if only you could realise that1 you would not want to be rich4 ,ordinary riches can be stolen from a man4 ,real riches cannot4 ,in the treasury-house of your soul1 there are infinitely precious things1 that may not be taken from you4 ,and so1 try to so shape your life that external things will not harm you4 ,and try also to get rid of personal property4 ,it involves sordid preoccupation1 endless industry1 continual wrong4 ,personal property hinders ,individualism at every step4' ,it is to be noted that ,jesus never says that impoverished people are necessarily good1 or wealthy people necessarily bad4 ,that would not have been true4 ,wealthy people are1 as a class1 better than impoverished people1 more moral1 more intellectual1 more well-behaved4 ,there is only one class in the community that thinks more about money than the rich1 and that is the poor4 ,the poor can think of nothing else4 ,that is the misery of being poor4 ,what ,jesus does say is that man reaches his perfection1 not through what he has1 not even through what he does1 but entirely through what he is4 ,and so the wealthy young man who comes to ,jesus is represented as a thoroughly good citizen1 who has broken none of the laws of his state1 none of the commandments of his religion4 ,he is quite respectable1 in the ordinary sense of that extraordinary word4 ,jesus says to him1 #8,you should give up private property4 ,it hinders you from realising your perfection4 ,it is a drag upon you4 ,it is a burden4 ,your personality does not need it4 ,it is within you1 and not outside of you1 that you will find what you really are1 and what you really want4' ,to his own friends he says the same thing4 ,he tells them to be themselves1 and not to be always worrying about other things4 ,what do other things matter8 ,man is complete in himself4 ,when they go into the world1 the world will disagree with them4 ,that is inevitable4 ,the world hates ,individualism4 ,but that is not to trouble them4 ,they are to be calm and self-centred4 ,if a man takes their cloak1 they are to give him their coat1 just to show that material things are of no importance4 ,if people abuse them1 they are not to answer back4 ,what does it signify8 ,the things people say of a man do not alter a man4 ,he is what he is4 ,public opinion is of no value whatsoever4 ,even if people employ actual violence1 they are not to be violent in turn4 ,that would be to fall to the same low level4 ,after all1 even in prison1 a man can be quite free4 ,his soul can be free4 ,his personality can be untroubled4 ,he can be at peace4 ,and1 above all things1 they are not to interfere with other people or judge them in any way4 ,personality is a very mysterious thing4 ,a man cannot always be estimated by what he does4 ,he may keep the law1 and yet be worthless4 ,he may break the law1 and yet be fine4 ,he may be bad1 without ever doing anything bad4 ,he may commit a sin against society1 and yet realise through that sin his true perfection4 ,there was a woman who was taken in adultery4 ,we are not told the history of her love1 but that love must have been very great2 for ,jesus said that her sins were forgiven her1 not because she repented1 but because her love was so intense and wonderful4 ,later on1 a short time before his death1 as he sat at a feast1 the woman came in and poured costly perfumes on his hair4 ,his friends tried to interfere with her1 and said that it was an extravagance1 and that the money that the perfume cost should have been expended on charitable relief of people in want1 or something of that kind4 ,jesus did not accept that view4 ,he pointed out that the material needs of ,man were great and very permanent1 but that the spiritual needs of ,man were greater still1 and that in one divine moment1 and by selecting its own mode of expression1 a personality might make itself perfect4 ,the world worships the woman1 even now1 as a saint4 ,yes2 there are suggestive things in ,individualism4 ,socialism annihilates family life1 for instance4 ,with the abolition of private property1 marriage in its present form must disappear4 ,this is part of the programme4 ,individualism accepts this and makes it fine4 ,it converts the abolition of legal restraint into a form of freedom that will help the full development of personality1 and make the love of man and woman more wonderful1 more beautiful1 and more ennobling4 ,jesus knew this4 ,he rejected the claims of family life1 although they existed in his day and community in a very marked form4 #8,who is my mother8 ,who are my brothers8' he said1 when he was told that they wished to speak to him4 ,when one of his followers asked leave to go and bury his father1 #8,let the dead bury the dead1' was his terrible answer4 ,he would allow no claim whatsoever to be made on personality4 ,and so he who would lead a ,christlike life is he who is perfectly and absolutely himself4 ,he may be a great poet1 or a great man of science2 or a young student at a ,university1 or one who watches sheep upon a moor2 or a maker of dramas1 like ,shakespeare1 or a thinker about ,god1 like ,spinoza2 or a child who plays in a garden1 or a fisherman who throws his net into the sea4 ,it does not matter what he is1 as long as he realises the perfection of the soul that is within him4 ,all imitation in morals and in life is wrong4 ,through the streets of ,jerusalem at the present day crawls one who is mad and carries a wooden cross on his shoulders4 ,he is a symbol of the lives that are marred by imitation4 ,father ,damien was ,christlike when he went out to live with the lepers1 because in such service he realised fully what was best in him4 ,but he was not more ,christlike than ,wagner when he realised his soul in music2 or than ,shelley1 when he realised his soul in song4 ,there is no one type for man4 ,there are as many perfections as there are imperfect men4 ,and while to the claims of charity a man may yield and yet be free1 to the claims of conformity no man may yield and remain free at all4 ,individualism1 then1 is what through ,socialism we are to attain to4 ,as a natural result the ,state must give up all idea of government4 ,it must give it up because1 as a wise man once said many centuries before ,christ1 there is such a thing as leaving mankind alone2 there is no such thing as governing mankind4 ,all modes of government are failures4 ,despotism is unjust to everybody1 including the despot1 who was probably made for better things4 ,oligarchies are unjust to the many1 and ochlocracies are unjust to the few4 ,high hopes were once formed of democracy2 but democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people4 ,it has been found out4 ,i must say that it was high time1 for all authority is quite degrading4 ,it degrades those who exercise it1 and degrades those over whom it is exercised4 ,when it is violently1 grossly1 and cruelly used1 it produces a good effect1 by creating1 or at any rate bringing out1 the spirit of revolt and ,individualism that is to kill it4 ,when it is used with a certain amount of kindness1 and accompanied by prizes and rewards1 it is dreadfully demoralising4 ,people1 in that case1 are less conscious of the horrible pressure that is being put on them1 and so go through their lives in a sort of coarse comfort1 like petted animals1 without ever realising that they are probably thinking other people's thoughts1 living by other people's standards1 wearing practically what one may call other people's second-hand clothes1 and never being themselves for a single moment4 #8,he who would be free1' says a fine thinker1 #8must not conform4' ,and authority1 by bribing people to conform1 produces a very gross kind of over-fed barbarism amongst us4 ,with authority1 punishment will pass away4 ,this will be a great gain--a gain1 in fact1 of incalculable value4 ,as one reads history1 not in the expurgated editions written for school-boys and passmen1 but in the original authorities of each time1 one is absolutely sickened1 not by the crimes that the wicked have committed1 but by the punishments that the good have inflicted2 and a community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment1 than it is by the occurrence of crime4 ,it obviously follows that the more punishment is inflicted the more crime is produced1 and most modern legislation has clearly recognised this1 and has made it its task to diminish punishment as far as it thinks it can4 ,wherever it has really diminished it1 the results have always been extremely good4 ,the less punishment1 the less crime4 ,when there is no punishment at all1 crime will either cease to exist1 or1 if it occurs1 will be treated by physicians as a very distressing form of dementia1 to be cured by care and kindness4 ,for what are called criminals nowadays are not criminals at all4 ,starvation1 and not sin1 is the parent of modern crime4 ,that indeed is the reason why our criminals are1 as a class1 so absolutely uninteresting from any psychological point of view4 ,they are not marvellous ,macbeths and terrible ,vautrins4 ,they are merely what ordinary1 respectable1 commonplace people would be if they had not got enough to eat4 ,when private property is abolished there will be no necessity for crime1 no demand for it2 it will cease to exist4 ,of course1 all crimes are not crimes against property1 though such are the crimes that the ,english law1 valuing what a man has more than what a man is1 punishes with the harshest and most horrible severity1 if we except the crime of murder1 and regard death as worse than penal servitude1 a point on which our criminals1 ,i believe1 disagree4 ,but though a crime may not be against property1 it may spring from the misery and rage and depression produced by our wrong system of property-holding1 and so1 when that system is abolished1 will disappear4 ,when each member of the community has sufficient for his wants1 and is not interfered with by his neighbour1 it will not be an object of any interest to him to interfere with anyone else4 ,jealousy1 which is an extraordinary source of crime in modern life1 is an emotion closely bound up with our conceptions of property1 and under ,socialism and ,individualism will die out4 ,it is remarkable that in communistic tribes jealousy is entirely unknown4 ,now as the ,state is not to govern1 it may be asked what the ,state is to do4 ,the ,state is to be a voluntary association that will organise labour1 and be the manufacturer and distributor of necessary commodities4 ,the ,state is to make what is useful4 ,the individual is to make what is beautiful4 ,and as ,i have mentioned the word labour1 ,i cannot help saying that a great deal of nonsense is being written and talked nowadays about the dignity of manual labour4 ,there is nothing necessarily dignified about manual labour at all1 and most of it is absolutely degrading4 ,it is mentally and morally injurious to man to do anything in which he does not find pleasure1 and many forms of labour are quite pleasureless activities1 and should be regarded as such4 ,to sweep a slushy crossing for eight hours1 on a day when the east wind is blowing is a disgusting occupation4 ,to sweep it with mental1 moral1 or physical dignity seems to me to be impossible4 ,to sweep it with joy would be appalling4 ,man is made for something better than disturbing dirt4 ,all work of that kind should be done by a machine4 ,and ,i have no doubt that it will be so4 ,up to the present1 man has been1 to a certain extent1 the slave of machinery1 and there is something tragic in the fact that as soon as man had invented a machine to do his work he began to starve4 ,this1 however1 is1 of course1 the result of our property system and our system of competition4 ,one man owns a machine which does the work of five hundred men4 ,five hundred men are1 in consequence1 thrown out of employment1 and1 having no work to do1 become hungry and take to thieving4 ,the one man secures the produce of the machine and keeps it1 and has five hundred times as much as he should have1 and probably1 which is of much more importance1 a great deal more than he really wants4 ,were that machine the property of all1 every one would benefit by it4 ,it would be an immense advantage to the community4 ,all unintellectual labour1 all monotonous1 dull labour1 all labour that deals with dreadful things1 and involves unpleasant conditions1 must be done by machinery4 ,machinery must work for us in coal mines1 and do all sanitary services1 and be the stoker of steamers1 and clean the streets1 and run messages on wet days1 and do anything that is tedious or distressing4 ,at present machinery competes against man4 ,under proper conditions machinery will serve man4 ,there is no doubt at all that this is the future of machinery1 and just as trees grow while the country gentleman is asleep1 so while ,humanity will be amusing itself1 or enjoying cultivated leisure--which1 and not labour1 is the aim of man--or making beautiful things1 or reading beautiful things1 or simply contemplating the world with admiration and delight1 machinery will be doing all the necessary and unpleasant work4 ,the fact is1 that civilisation requires slaves4 ,the ,greeks were quite right there4 ,unless there are slaves to do the ugly1 horrible1 uninteresting work1 culture and contemplation become almost impossible4 ,human slavery is wrong1 insecure1 and demoralising4 ,on mechanical slavery1 on the slavery of the machine1 the future of the world depends4 ,and when scientific men are no longer called upon to go down to a depressing ,east ,end and distribute bad cocoa and worse blankets to starving people1 they will have delightful leisure in which to devise wonderful and marvellous things for their own joy and the joy of everyone else4 ,there will be great storages of force for every city1 and for every house if required1 and this force man will convert into heat1 light1 or motion1 according to his needs4 ,is this ,utopian8 ,a map of the world that does not include ,utopia is not worth even glancing at1 for it leaves out the one country at which ,humanity is always landing4 ,and when ,humanity lands there1 it looks out1 and1 seeing a better country1 sets sail4 ,progress is the realisation of ,utopias4 ,now1 ,i have said that the community by means of organisation of machinery will supply the useful things1 and that the beautiful things will be made by the individual4 ,this is not merely necessary1 but it is the only possible way by which we can get either the one or the other4 ,an individual who has to make things for the use of others1 and with reference to their wants and their wishes1 does not work with interest1 and consequently cannot put into his work what is best in him4 ,upon the other hand1 whenever a community or a powerful section of a community1 or a government of any kind1 attempts to dictate to the artist what he is to do1 ,art either entirely vanishes1 or becomes stereotyped1 or degenerates into a low and ignoble form of craft4 ,a work of art is the unique result of a unique temperament4 ,its beauty comes from the fact that the author is what he is4 ,it has nothing to do with the fact that other people want what they want4 ,indeed1 the moment that an artist takes notice of what other people want1 and tries to supply the demand1 he ceases to be an artist1 and becomes a dull or an amusing craftsman1 an honest or a dishonest tradesman4 ,he has no further claim to be considered as an artist4 ,art is the most intense mode of ,individualism that the world has known4 ,i am inclined to say that it is the only real mode of ,individualism that the world has known4 ,crime1 which1 under certain conditions1 may seem to have created ,individualism1 must take cognisance of other people and interfere with them4 ,it belongs to the sphere of action4 ,but alone1 without any reference to his neighbours1 without any interference1 the artist can fashion a beautiful thing2 and if he does not do it solely for his own pleasure1 he is not an artist at all4 ,and it is to be noted that it is the fact that ,art is this intense form of ,individualism that makes the public try to exercise over it in an authority that is as immoral as it is ridiculous1 and as corrupting as it is contemptible4 ,it is not quite their fault4 ,the public has always1 and in every age1 been badly brought up4 ,they are continually asking ,art to be popular1 to please their want of taste1 to flatter their absurd vanity1 to tell them what they have been told before1 to show them what they ought to be tired of seeing1 to amuse them when they feel heavy after eating too much1 and to distract their thoughts when they are wearied of their own stupidity4 ,now ,art should never try to be popular4 ,the public should try to make itself artistic4 ,there is a very wide difference4 ,if a man of science were told that the results of his experiments1 and the conclusions that he arrived at1 should be of such a character that they would not upset the received popular notions on the subject1 or disturb popular prejudice1 or hurt the sensibilities of people who knew nothing about science2 if a philosopher were told that he had a perfect right to speculate in the highest spheres of thought1 provided that he arrived at the same conclusions as were held by those who had never thought in any sphere at all--well1 nowadays the man of science and the philosopher would be considerably amused4 ,yet it is really a very few years since both philosophy and science were subjected to brutal popular control1 to authority in fact--the authority of either the general ignorance of the community1 or the terror and greed for power of an ecclesiastical or governmental class4 ,of course1 we have to a very great extent got rid of any attempt on the part of the community1 or the ,church1 or the ,government1 to interfere with the individualism of speculative thought1 but the attempt to interfere with the individualism of imaginative art still lingers4 ,in fact1 it does more than linger2 it is aggressive1 offensive1 and brutalising4 ,in ,england1 the arts that have escaped best are the arts in which the public take no interest4 ,poetry is an instance of what ,i mean4 ,we have been able to have fine poetry in ,england because the public do not read it1 and consequently do not influence it4 ,the public like to insult poets because they are individual1 but once they have insulted them1 they leave them alone4 ,in the case of the novel and the drama1 arts in which the public do take an interest1 the result of the exercise of popular authority has been absolutely ridiculous4 ,no country produces such badly-written fiction1 such tedious1 common work in the novel form1 such silly1 vulgar plays as ,england4 ,it must necessarily be so4 ,the popular standard is of such a character that no artist can get to it4 ,it is at once too easy and too difficult to be a popular novelist4 ,it is too easy1 because the requirements of the public as far as plot1 style1 psychology1 treatment of life1 and treatment of literature are concerned are within the reach of the very meanest capacity and the most uncultivated mind4 ,it is too difficult1 because to meet such requirements the artist would have to do violence to his temperament1 would have to write not for the artistic joy of writing1 but for the amusement of half-educated people1 and so would have to suppress his individualism1 forget his culture1 annihilate his style1 and surrender everything that is valuable in him4 ,in the case of the drama1 things are a little better3 the theatre-going public like the obvious1 it is true1 but they do not like the tedious2 and burlesque and farcical comedy1 the two most popular forms1 are distinct forms of art4 ,delightful work may be produced under burlesque and farcical conditions1 and in work of this kind the artist in ,england is allowed very great freedom4 ,it is when one comes to the higher forms of the drama that the result of popular control is seen4 ,the one thing that the public dislike is novelty4 ,any attempt to extend the subject-matter of art is extremely distasteful to the public2 and yet the vitality and progress of art depend in a large measure on the continual extension of subject-matter4 ,the public dislike novelty because they are afraid of it4 ,it represents to them a mode of ,individualism1 an assertion on the part of the artist that he selects his own subject1 and treats it as he chooses4 ,the public are quite right in their attitude4 ,art is ,individualism1 and ,individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force4 ,therein lies its immense value4 ,for what it seeks to disturb is monotony of type1 slavery of custom1 tyranny of habit1 and the reduction of man to the level of a machine4 ,in ,art1 the public accept what has been1 because they cannot alter it1 not because they appreciate it4 ,they swallow their classics whole1 and never taste them4 ,they endure them as the inevitable1 and as they cannot mar them1 they mouth about them4 ,strangely enough1 or not strangely1 according to one's own views1 this acceptance of the classics does a great deal of harm4 ,the uncritical admiration of the ,bible and ,shakespeare in ,england is an instance of what ,i mean4 ,with regard to the ,bible1 considerations of ecclesiastical authority enter into the matter1 so that ,i need not dwell upon the point4 ,but in the case of ,shakespeare it is quite obvious that the public really see neither the beauties nor the defects of his plays4 ,if they saw the beauties1 they would not object to the development of the drama2 and if they saw the defects1 they would not object to the development of the drama either4 ,the fact is1 the public make use of the classics of a country as a means of checking the progress of ,art4 ,they degrade the classics into authorities4 ,they use them as bludgeons for preventing the free expression of ,beauty in new forms4 ,they are always asking a writer why he does not write like somebody else1 or a painter why he does not paint like somebody else1 quite oblivious of the fact that if either of them did anything of the kind he would cease to be an artist4 ,a fresh mode of ,beauty is absolutely distasteful to them1 and whenever it appears they get so angry1 and bewildered that they always use two stupid expressions--one is that the work of art is grossly unintelligible2 the other1 that the work of art is grossly immoral4 ,what they mean by these words seems to me to be this4 ,when they say a work is grossly unintelligible1 they mean that the artist has said or made a beautiful thing that is new2 when they describe a work as grossly immoral1 they mean that the artist has said or made a beautiful thing that is true4 ,the former expression has reference to style2 the latter to subject-matter4 ,but they probably use the words very vaguely1 as an ordinary mob will use ready-made paving-stones4 ,there is not a single real poet or prose-writer of this century1 for instance1 on whom the ,british public have not solemnly conferred diplomas of immorality1 and these diplomas practically take the place1 with us1 of what in ,france1 is the formal recognition of an ,academy of ,letters1 and fortunately make the establishment of such an institution quite unnecessary in ,england4 ,of course1 the public are very reckless in their use of the word4 ,that they should have called ,wordsworth an immoral poet1 was only to be expected4 ,wordsworth was a poet4 ,but that they should have called ,charles ,kingsley an immoral novelist is extraordinary4 ,kingsley's prose was not of a very fine quality4 ,still1 there is the word1 and they use it as best they can4 ,an artist is1 of course1 not disturbed by it4 ,the true artist is a man who believes absolutely in himself1 because he is absolutely himself4 ,but ,i can fancy that if an artist produced a work of art in ,england that immediately on its appearance was recognised by the public1 through their medium1 which is the public press1 as a work that was quite intelligible and highly moral1 he would begin to seriously question whether in its creation he had really been himself at all1 and consequently whether the work was not quite unworthy of him1 and either of a thoroughly second-rate order1 or of no artistic value whatsoever4 ,perhaps1 however1 ,i have wronged the public in limiting them to such words as #8immoral1' #8unintelligible1' #8exotic1' and #8unhealthy4' ,there is one other word that they use4 ,that word is #8morbid4' ,they do not use it often4 ,the meaning of the word is so simple that they are afraid of using it4 ,still1 they use it sometimes1 and1 now and then1 one comes across it in popular newspapers4 ,it is1 of course1 a ridiculous word to apply to a work of art4 ,for what is morbidity but a mood of emotion or a mode of thought that one cannot express8 ,the public are all morbid1 because the public can never find expression for anything4 ,the artist is never morbid4 ,he expresses everything4 ,he stands outside his subject1 and through its medium produces incomparable and artistic effects4 ,to call an artist morbid because he deals with morbidity as his subject-matter is as silly as if one called ,shakespeare mad because he wrote #8,king ,lear4' ,on the whole1 an artist in ,england gains something by being attacked4 ,his individuality is intensified4 ,he becomes more completely himself4 ,of course1 the attacks are very gross1 very impertinent1 and very contemptible4 ,but then no artist expects grace from the vulgar mind1 or style from the suburban intellect4 ,vulgarity and stupidity are two very vivid facts in modern life4 ,one regrets them1 naturally4 ,but there they are4 ,they are subjects for study1 like everything else4 ,and it is only fair to state1 with regard to modern journalists1 that they always apologise to one in private for what they have written against one in public4 ,within the last few years two other adjectives1 it may be mentioned1 have been added to the very limited vocabulary of art-abuse that is at the disposal of the public4 ,one is the word #8unhealthy1' the other is the word #8exotic4' ,the latter merely expresses the rage of the momentary mushroom against the immortal1 entrancing1 and exquisitely lovely orchid4 ,it is a tribute1 but a tribute of no importance4 ,the word #8unhealthy1' however1 admits of analysis4 ,it is a rather interesting word4 ,in fact1 it is so interesting that the people who use it do not know what it means4 ,what does it mean8 ,what is a healthy1 or an unhealthy work of art8 ,all terms that one applies to a work of art1 provided that one applies them rationally1 have reference to either its style or its subject1 or to both together4 ,from the point of view of style1 a healthy work of art is one whose style recognises the beauty of the material it employs1 be that material one of words or of bronze1 of colour or of ivory1 and uses that beauty as a factor in producing the sthetic effect4 ,from the point of view of subject1 a healthy work of art is one the choice of whose subject is conditioned by the temperament of the artist1 and comes directly out of it4 ,in fine1 a healthy work of art is one that has both perfection and personality4 ,of course1 form and substance cannot be separated in a work of art2 they are always one4 ,but for purposes of analysis1 and setting the wholeness of sthetic impression aside for a moment1 we can intellectually so separate them4 ,an unhealthy work of art1 on the other hand1 is a work whose style is obvious1 old-fashioned1 and common1 and whose subject is deliberately chosen1 not because the artist has any pleasure in it1 but because he thinks that the public will pay him for it4 ,in fact1 the popular novel that the public calls healthy is always a thoroughly unhealthy production2 and what the public call an unhealthy novel is always a beautiful and healthy work of art4 ,i need hardly say that ,i am not1 for a single moment1 complaining that the public and the public press misuse these words4 ,i do not see how1 with their lack of comprehension of what ,art is1 they could possibly use them in the proper sense4 ,i am merely pointing out the misuse2 and as for the origin of the misuse and the meaning that lies behind it all1 the explanation is very simple4 ,it comes from the barbarous conception of authority4 ,it comes from the natural inability of a community corrupted by authority to understand or appreciate ,individualism4 ,in a word1 it comes from that monstrous and ignorant thing that is called ,public ,opinion1 which1 bad and well-meaning as it is when it tries to control action1 is infamous and of evil meaning when it tries to control ,thought or ,art4 ,indeed1 there is much more to be said in favour of the physical force of the public than there is in favour of the public's opinion4 ,the former may be fine4 ,the latter must be foolish4 ,it is often said that force is no argument4 ,that1 however1 entirely depends on what one wants to prove4 ,many of the most important problems of the last few centuries1 such as the continuance of personal government in ,england1 or of feudalism in ,france1 have been solved entirely by means of physical force4 ,the very violence of a revolution may make the public grand and splendid for a moment4 ,it was a fatal day when the public discovered that the pen is mightier than the paving-stone1 and can be made as offensive as the brickbat4 ,they at once sought for the journalist1 found him1 developed him1 and made him their industrious and well-paid servant4 ,it is greatly to be regretted1 for both their sakes4 ,behind the barricade there may be much that is noble and heroic4 ,but what is there behind the leading-article but prejudice1 stupidity1 cant1 and twaddle8 ,and when these four are joined together they make a terrible force1 and constitute the new authority4 ,in old days men had the rack4 ,now they have the press4 ,that is an improvement certainly4 ,but still it is very bad1 and wrong1 and demoralising4 ,somebody--was it ,burke8--called journalism the fourth estate4 ,that was true at the time1 no doubt4 ,but at the present moment it really is the only estate4 ,it has eaten up the other three4 ,the ,lords ,temporal say nothing1 the ,lords ,spiritual have nothing to say1 and the ,house of ,commons has nothing to say and says it4 ,we are dominated by ,journalism4 ,in ,america the ,president reigns for four years1 and ,journalism governs for ever and ever4 ,fortunately in ,america ,journalism has carried its authority to the grossest and most brutal extreme4 ,as a natural consequence it has begun to create a spirit of revolt4 ,people are amused by it1 or disgusted by it1 according to their temperaments4 ,but it is no longer the real force it was4 ,it is not seriously treated4 ,in ,england1 ,journalism1 not1 except in a few well-known instances1 having been carried to such excesses of brutality1 is still a great factor1 a really remarkable power4 ,the tyranny that it proposes to exercise over people's private lives seems to me to be quite extraordinary4 ,the fact is1 that the public have an insatiable curiosity to know everything1 except what is worth knowing4 ,journalism1 conscious of this1 and having tradesman-like habits1 supplies their demands4 ,in centuries before ours the public nailed the ears of journalists to the pump4 ,that was quite hideous4 ,in this century journalists have nailed their own ears to the keyhole4 ,that is much worse4 ,and what aggravates the mischief is that the journalists who are most to blame are not the amusing journalists who write for what are called ,society papers4 ,the harm is done by the serious1 thoughtful1 earnest journalists1 who solemnly1 as they are doing at present1 will drag before the eyes of the public some incident in the private life of a great statesman1 of a man who is a leader of political thought as he is a creator of political force1 and invite the public to discuss the incident1 to exercise authority in the matter1 to give their views1 and not merely to give their views1 but to carry them into action1 to dictate to the man upon all other points1 to dictate to his party1 to dictate to his country2 in fact1 to make themselves ridiculous1 offensive1 and harmful4 ,the private lives of men and women should not be told to the public4 ,the public have nothing to do with them at all4 ,in ,france they manage these things better4 ,there they do not allow the details of the trials that take place in the divorce courts to be published for the amusement or criticism of the public4 ,all that the public are allowed to know is that the divorce has taken place and was granted on petition of one or other or both of the married parties concerned4 ,in ,france1 in fact1 they limit the journalist1 and allow the artist almost perfect freedom4 ,here we allow absolute freedom to the journalist1 and entirely limit the artist4 ,english public opinion1 that is to say1 tries to constrain and impede and warp the man who makes things that are beautiful in effect1 and compels the journalist to retail things that are ugly1 or disgusting1 or revolting in fact1 so that we have the most serious journalists in the world1 and the most indecent newspapers4 ,it is no exaggeration to talk of compulsion4 ,there are possibly some journalists who take a real pleasure in publishing horrible things1 or who1 being poor1 look to scandals as forming a sort of permanent basis for an income4 ,but there are other journalists1 ,i feel certain1 men of education and cultivation1 who really dislike publishing these things1 who know that it is wrong to do so1 and only do it because the unhealthy conditions under which their occupation is carried on oblige them to supply the public with what the public wants1 and to compete with other journalists in making that supply as full and satisfying to the gross popular appetite as possible4 ,it is a very degrading position for any body of educated men to be placed in1 and ,i have no doubt that most of them feel it acutely4 ,however1 let us leave what is really a very sordid side of the subject1 and return to the question of popular control in the matter of ,art1 by which ,i mean ,public ,opinion dictating to the artist the form which he is to use1 the mode in which he is to use it1 and the materials with which he is to work4 ,i have pointed out that the arts which have escaped best in ,england are the arts in which the public have not been interested4 ,they are1 however1 interested in the drama1 and as a certain advance has been made in the drama within the last ten or fifteen years1 it is important to point out that this advance is entirely due to a few individual artists refusing to accept the popular want of taste as their standard1 and refusing to regard ,art as a mere matter of demand and supply4 ,with his marvellous and vivid personality1 with a style that has really a true colour-element in it1 with his extraordinary power1 not over mere mimicry but over imaginative and intellectual creation1 ,mr ,irving1 had his sole object been to give the public what they wanted1 could have produced the commonest plays in the commonest manner1 and made as much success and money as a man could possibly desire4 ,but his object was not that4 ,his object was to realise his own perfection as an artist1 under certain conditions1 and in certain forms of ,art4 ,at first he appealed to the few3 now he has educated the many4 ,he has created in the public both taste and temperament4 ,the public appreciate his artistic success immensely4 ,i often wonder1 however1 whether the public understand that that success is entirely due to the fact that he did not accept their standard1 but realised his own4 ,with their standard the ,lyceum would have been a sort of second-rate booth1 as some of the popular theatres in ,london are at present4 ,whether they understand it or not the fact however remains1 that taste and temperament have1 to a certain extent been created in the public1 and that the public is capable of developing these qualities4 ,the problem then is1 why do not the public become more civilised8 ,they have the capacity4 ,what stops them8 ,the thing that stops them1 it must be said again1 is their desire to exercise authority over the artist and over works of art4 ,to certain theatres1 such as the ,lyceum and the ,haymarket1 the public seem to come in a proper mood4 ,in both of these theatres there have been individual artists1 who have succeeded in creating in their audiences--and every theatre in ,london has its own audience--the temperament to which ,art appeals4 ,and what is that temperament8 ,it is the temperament of receptivity4 ,that is all4 ,if a man approaches a work of art with any desire to exercise authority over it and the artist1 he approaches it in such a spirit that he cannot receive any artistic impression from it at all4 ,the work of art is to dominate the spectator3 the spectator is not to dominate the work of art4 ,the spectator is to be receptive4 ,he is to be the violin on which the master is to play4 ,and the more completely he can suppress his own silly views1 his own foolish prejudices1 his own absurd ideas of what ,art should be1 or should not be1 the more likely he is to understand and appreciate the work of art in question4 ,this is1 of course1 quite obvious in the case of the vulgar theatre-going public of ,english men and women4 ,but it is equally true of what are called educated people4 ,for an educated person's ideas of ,art are drawn naturally from what ,art has been1 whereas the new work of art is beautiful by being what ,art has never been2 and to measure it by the standard of the past is to measure it by a standard on the rejection of which its real perfection depends4 ,a temperament capable of receiving1 through an imaginative medium1 and under imaginative conditions1 new and beautiful impressions1 is the only temperament that can appreciate a work of art4 ,and true as this is in the case of the appreciation of sculpture and painting1 it is still more true of the appreciation of such arts as the drama4 ,for a picture and a statue are not at war with ,time4 ,they take no count of its succession4 ,in one moment their unity may be apprehended4 ,in the case of literature it is different4 ,time must be traversed before the unity of effect is realised4 ,and so1 in the drama1 there may occur in the first act of the play something whose real artistic value may not be evident to the spectator till the third or fourth act is reached4 ,is the silly fellow to get angry and call out1 and disturb the play1 and annoy the artists8 ,no4 ,the honest man is to sit quietly1 and know the delightful emotions of wonder1 curiosity1 and suspense4 ,he is not to go to the play to lose a vulgar temper4 ,he is to go to the play to realise an artistic temperament4 ,he is to go to the play to gain an artistic temperament4 ,he is not the arbiter of the work of art4 ,he is one who is admitted to contemplate the work of art1 and1 if the work be fine1 to forget in its contemplation and the egotism that mars him--the egotism of his ignorance1 or the egotism of his information4 ,this point about the drama is hardly1 ,i think1 sufficiently recognised4 ,i can quite understand that were #8,macbeth' produced for the first time before a modern ,london audience1 many of the people present would strongly and vigorously object to the introduction of the witches in the first act1 with their grotesque phrases and their ridiculous words4 ,but when the play is over one realises that the laughter of the witches in #8,macbeth' is as terrible as the laughter of madness in #8,lear1' more terrible than the laughter of ,iago in the tragedy of the ,moor4 ,no spectator of art needs a more perfect mood of receptivity than the spectator of a play4 ,the moment he seeks to exercise authority he becomes the avowed enemy of ,art and of himself4 ,art does not mind4 ,it is he who suffers4 ,with the novel it is the same thing4 ,popular authority and the recognition of popular authority are fatal4 ,thackeray's #8,esmond' is a beautiful work of art because he wrote it to please himself4 ,in his other novels1 in #8,pendennis1' in #8,philip1' in #8,vanity ,fair' even1 at times1 he is too conscious of the public1 and spoils his work by appealing directly to the sympathies of the public1 or by directly mocking at them4 ,a true artist takes no notice whatever of the public4 ,the public are to him non-existent4 ,he has no poppied or honeyed cakes through which to give the monster sleep or sustenance4 ,he leaves that to the popular novelist4 ,one incomparable novelist we have now in ,england1 ,mr ,george ,meredith4 ,there are better artists in ,france1 but ,france has no one whose view of life is so large1 so varied1 so imaginatively true4 ,there are tellers of stories in ,russia who have a more vivid sense of what pain in fiction may be4 ,but to him belongs philosophy in fiction4 ,his people not merely live1 but they live in thought4 ,one can see them from myriad points of view4 ,they are suggestive4 ,there is soul in them and around them4 ,they are interpretative and symbolic4 ,and he who made them1 those wonderful quickly-moving figures1 made them for his own pleasure1 and has never asked the public what they wanted1 has never cared to know what they wanted1 has never allowed the public to dictate to him or influence him in any way but has gone on intensifying his own personality1 and producing his own individual work4 ,at first none came to him4 ,that did not matter4 ,then the few came to him4 ,that did not change him4 ,the many have come now4 ,he is still the same4 ,he is an incomparable novelist4 ,with the decorative arts it is not different4 ,the public clung with really pathetic tenacity to what ,i believe were the direct traditions of the ,great ,exhibition of international vulgarity1 traditions that were so appalling that the houses in which people lived were only fit for blind people to live in4 ,beautiful things began to be made1 beautiful colours came from the dyer's hand1 beautiful patterns from the artist's brain1 and the use of beautiful things and their value and importance were set forth4 ,the public were really very indignant4 ,they lost their temper4 ,they said silly things4 ,no one minded4 ,no one was a whit the worse4 ,no one accepted the authority of public opinion4 ,and now it is almost impossible to enter any modern house without seeing some recognition of good taste1 some recognition of the value of lovely surroundings1 some sign of appreciation of beauty4 ,in fact1 people's houses are1 as a rule1 quite charming nowadays4 ,people have been to a very great extent civilised4 ,it is only fair to state1 however1 that the extraordinary success of the revolution in house-decoration and furniture and the like has not really been due to the majority of the public developing a very fine taste in such matters4 ,it has been chiefly due to the fact that the craftsmen of things so appreciated the pleasure of making what was beautiful1 and woke to such a vivid consciousness of the hideousness and vulgarity of what the public had previously wanted1 that they simply starved the public out4 ,it would be quite impossible at the present moment to furnish a room as rooms were furnished a few years ago1 without going for everything to an auction of second-hand furniture from some third-rate lodging-house4 ,the things are no longer made4 ,however they may object to it1 people must nowadays have something charming in their surroundings4 ,fortunately for them1 their assumption of authority in these art-matters came to entire grief4 ,it is evident1 then1 that all authority in such things is bad4 ,people sometimes inquire what form of government is most suitable for an artist to live under4 ,to this question there is only one answer4 ,the form of government that is most suitable to the artist is no government at all4 ,authority over him and his art is ridiculous4 ,it has been stated that under despotisms artists have produced lovely work4 ,this is not quite so4 ,artists have visited despots1 not as subjects to be tyrannised over1 but as wandering wonder-makers1 as fascinating vagrant personalities1 to be entertained and charmed and suffered to be at peace1 and allowed to create4 ,there is this to be said in favour of the despot1 that he1 being an individual1 may have culture1 while the mob1 being a monster1 has none4 ,one who is an ,emperor and ,king may stoop down to pick up a brush for a painter1 but when the democracy stoops down it is merely to throw mud4 ,and yet the democracy have not so far to stoop as the emperor4 ,in fact1 when they want to throw mud they have not to stoop at all4 ,but there is no necessity to separate the monarch from the mob2 all authority is equally bad4 ,there are three kinds of despots4 ,there is the despot who tyrannises over the body4 ,there is the despot who tyrannises over the soul4 ,there is the despot who tyrannises over the soul and body alike4 ,the first is called the ,prince4 ,the second is called the ,pope4 ,the third is called the ,people4 ,the ,prince may be cultivated4 ,many ,princes have been4 ,yet in the ,prince there is danger4 ,one thinks of ,dante at the bitter feast in ,verona1 of ,tasso in ,ferrara's madman's cell4 ,it is better for the artist not to live with ,princes4 ,the ,pope may be cultivated4 ,many ,popes have been2 the bad ,popes have been4 ,the bad ,popes loved ,beauty1 almost as passionately1 nay1 with as much passion as the good ,popes hated ,thought4 ,to the wickedness of the ,papacy humanity owes much4 ,the goodness of the ,papacy owes a terrible debt to humanity4 ,yet1 though the ,vatican has kept the rhetoric of its thunders1 and lost the rod of its lightning1 it is better for the artist not to live with ,popes4 ,it was a ,pope who said of ,cellini to a conclave of ,cardinals that common laws and common authority were not made for men such as he2 but it was a ,pope who thrust ,cellini into prison1 and kept him there till he sickened with rage1 and created unreal visions for himself1 and saw the gilded sun enter his room1 and grew so enamoured of it that he sought to escape1 and crept out from tower to tower1 and falling through dizzy air at dawn1 maimed himself1 and was by a vine-dresser covered with vine leaves1 and carried in a cart to one who1 loving beautiful things1 had care of him4 ,there is danger in ,popes4 ,and as for the ,people1 what of them and their authority8 ,perhaps of them and their authority one has spoken enough4 ,their authority is a thing blind1 deaf1 hideous1 grotesque1 tragic1 amusing1 serious1 and obscene4 ,it is impossible for the artist to live with the ,people4 ,all despots bribe4 ,the people bribe and brutalise4 ,who told them to exercise authority8 ,they were made to live1 to listen1 and to love4 ,someone has done them a great wrong4 ,they have marred themselves by imitation of their inferiors4 ,they have taken the sceptre of the ,prince4 ,how should they use it8 ,they have taken the triple tiara of the ,pope4 ,how should they carry its burden8 ,they are as a clown whose heart is broken4 ,they are as a priest whose soul is not yet born4 ,let all who love ,beauty pity them4 ,though they themselves love not ,beauty1 yet let them pity themselves4 ,who taught them the trick of tyranny8 ,there are many other things that one might point out4 ,one might point out how the ,renaissance was great1 because it sought to solve no social problem1 and busied itself not about such things1 but suffered the individual to develop freely1 beautifully1 and naturally1 and so had great and individual artists1 and great and individual men4 ,one might point out how ,louis ,,xiv41 by creating the modern state1 destroyed the individualism of the artist1 and made things monstrous in their monotony of repetition1 and contemptible in their conformity to rule1 and destroyed throughout all ,france all those fine freedoms of expression that had made tradition new in beauty1 and new modes one with antique form4 ,but the past is of no importance4 ,the present is of no importance4 ,it is with the future that we have to deal4 ,for the past is what man should not have been4 ,the present is what man ought not to be4 ,the future is what artists are4 ,it will1 of course1 be said that such a scheme as is set forth here is quite unpractical1 and goes against human nature4 ,this is perfectly true4 ,it is unpractical1 and it goes against human nature4 ,this is why it is worth carrying out1 and that is why one proposes it4 ,for what is a practical scheme8 ,a practical scheme is either a scheme that is already in existence1 or a scheme that could be carried out under existing conditions4 ,but it is exactly the existing conditions that one objects to2 and any scheme that could accept these conditions is wrong and foolish4 ,the conditions will be done away with1 and human nature will change4 ,the only thing that one really knows about human nature is that it changes4 ,change is the one quality we can predicate of it4 ,the systems that fail are those that rely on the permanency of human nature1 and not on its growth and development4 ,the error of ,louis ,,xiv4 was that he thought human nature would always be the same4 ,the result of his error was the ,french ,revolution4 ,it was an admirable result4 ,all the results of the mistakes of governments are quite admirable4 ,it is to be noted also that ,individualism does not come to man with any sickly cant about duty1 which merely means doing what other people want because they want it2 or any hideous cant about self-sacrifice1 which is merely a survival of savage mutilation4 ,in fact1 it does not come to man with any claims upon him at all4 ,it comes naturally and inevitably out of man4 ,it is the point to which all development tends4 ,it is the differentiation to which all organisms grow4 ,it is the perfection that is inherent in every mode of life1 and towards which every mode of life quickens4 ,and so ,individualism exercises no compulsion over man4 ,on the contrary1 it says to man that he should suffer no compulsion to be exercised over him4 ,it does not try to force people to be good4 ,it knows that people are good when they are let alone4 ,man will develop ,individualism out of himself4 ,man is now so developing ,individualism4 ,to ask whether ,individualism is practical is like asking whether ,evolution is practical4 ,evolution is the law of life1 and there is no evolution except towards ,individualism4 ,where this tendency is not expressed1 it is a case of artificially-arrested growth1 or of disease1 or of death4 ,individualism will also be unselfish and unaffected4 ,it has been pointed out that one of the results of the extraordinary tyranny of authority is that words are absolutely distorted from their proper and simple meaning1 and are used to express the obverse of their right signification4 ,what is true about ,art is true about ,life4 ,a man is called affected1 nowadays1 if he dresses as he likes to dress4 ,but in doing that he is acting in a perfectly natural manner4 ,affectation1 in such matters1 consists in dressing according to the views of one's neighbour1 whose views1 as they are the views of the majority1 will probably be extremely stupid4 ,or a man is called selfish if he lives in the manner that seems to him most suitable for the full realisation of his own personality2 if1 in fact1 the primary aim of his life is self-development4 ,but this is the way in which everyone should live4 ,selfishness is not living as one wishes to live1 it is asking others to live as one wishes to live4 ,and unselfishness is letting other people's lives alone1 not interfering with them4 ,selfishness always aims at creating around it an absolute uniformity of type4 ,unselfishness recognises infinite variety of type as a delightful thing1 accepts it1 acquiesces in it1 enjoys it4 ,it is not selfish to think for oneself4 ,a man who does not think for himself does not think at all4 ,it is grossly selfish to require of ones neighbour that he should think in the same way1 and hold the same opinions4 ,why should he8 ,if he can think1 he will probably think differently4 ,if he cannot think1 it is monstrous to require thought of any kind from him4 ,a red rose is not selfish because it wants to be a red rose4 ,it would be horribly selfish if it wanted all the other flowers in the garden to be both red and roses4 ,under ,individualism people will be quite natural and absolutely unselfish1 and will know the meanings of the words1 and realise them in their free1 beautiful lives4 ,nor will men be egotistic as they are now4 ,for the egotist is he who makes claims upon others1 and the ,individualist will not desire to do that4 ,it will not give him pleasure4 ,when man has realised ,individualism1 he will also realise sympathy and exercise it freely and spontaneously4 ,up to the present man has hardly cultivated sympathy at all4 ,he has merely sympathy with pain1 and sympathy with pain is not the highest form of sympathy4 ,all sympathy is fine1 but sympathy with suffering is the least fine mode4 ,it is tainted with egotism4 ,it is apt to become morbid4 ,there is in it a certain element of terror for our own safety4 ,we become afraid that we ourselves might be as the leper or as the blind1 and that no man would have care of us4 ,it is curiously limiting1 too4 ,one should sympathise with the entirety of life1 not with life's sores and maladies merely1 but with life's joy and beauty and energy and health and freedom4 ,the wider sympathy is1 of course1 the more difficult4 ,it requires more unselfishness4 ,anybody can sympathise with the sufferings of a friend1 but it requires a very fine nature--it requires1 in fact1 the nature of a true ,individualist--to sympathise with a friend's success4 ,in the modern stress of competition and struggle for place1 such sympathy is naturally rare1 and is also very much stifled by the immoral ideal of uniformity of type and conformity to rule which is so prevalent everywhere1 and is perhaps most obnoxious in ,england4 ,sympathy with pain there will1 of course1 always be4 ,it is one of the first instincts of man4 ,the animals which are individual1 the higher animals1 that is to say1 share it with us4 ,but it must be remembered that while sympathy with joy intensifies the sum of joy in the world1 sympathy with pain does not really diminish the amount of pain4 ,it may make man better able to endure evil1 but the evil remains4 ,sympathy with consumption does not cure consumption2 that is what ,science does4 ,and when ,socialism has solved the problem of poverty1 and ,science solved the problem of disease1 the area of the sentimentalists will be lessened1 and the sympathy of man will be large1 healthy1 and spontaneous4 ,man will have joy in the contemplation of the joyous life of others4 ,for it is through joy that the ,individualism of the future will develop itself4 ,christ made no attempt to reconstruct society1 and consequently the ,individualism that he preached to man could be realised only through pain or in solitude4 ,the ideals that we owe to ,christ are the ideals of the man who abandons society entirely1 or of the man who resists society absolutely4 ,but man is naturally social4 ,even the ,thebaid became peopled at last4 ,and though the cenobite realises his personality1 it is often an impoverished personality that he so realises4 ,upon the other hand1 the terrible truth that pain is a mode through which man may realise himself exercises a wonderful fascination over the world4 ,shallow speakers and shallow thinkers in pulpits and on platforms often talk about the world's worship of pleasure1 and whine against it4 ,but it is rarely in the world's history that its ideal has been one of joy and beauty4 ,the worship of pain has far more often dominated the world4 ,medivalism1 with its saints and martyrs1 its love of self-torture1 its wild passion for wounding itself1 its gashing with knives1 and its whipping with rods--,medivalism is real ,christianity1 and the medival ,christ is the real ,christ4 ,when the ,renaissance dawned upon the world1 and brought with it the new ideals of the beauty of life and the joy of living1 men could not understand ,christ4 ,even ,art shows us that4 ,the painters of the ,renaissance drew ,christ as a little boy playing with another boy in a palace or a garden1 or lying back in his mother's arms1 smiling at her1 or at a flower1 or at a bright bird2 or as a noble1 stately figure moving nobly through the world2 or as a wonderful figure rising in a sort of ecstasy from death to life4 ,even when they drew him crucified they drew him as a beautiful ,god on whom evil men had inflicted suffering4 ,but he did not preoccupy them much4 ,what delighted them was to paint the men and women whom they admired1 and to show the loveliness of this lovely earth4 ,they painted many religious pictures--in fact1 they painted far too many1 and the monotony of type and motive is wearisome1 and was bad for art4 ,it was the result of the authority of the public in art-matters1 and is to be deplored4 ,but their soul was not in the subject4 ,raphael was a great artist when he painted his portrait of the ,pope4 ,when he painted his ,madonnas and infant ,christs1 he is not a great artist at all4 ,christ had no message for the ,renaissance1 which was wonderful because it brought an ideal at variance with his1 and to find the presentation of the real ,christ we must go to medival art4 ,there he is one maimed and marred2 one who is not comely to look on1 because ,beauty is a joy2 one who is not in fair raiment1 because that may be a joy also3 he is a beggar who has a marvellous soul2 he is a leper whose soul is divine2 he needs neither property nor health2 he is a ,god realising his perfection through pain4 ,the evolution of man is slow4 ,the injustice of men is great4 ,it was necessary that pain should be put forward as a mode of self-realisation4 ,even now1 in some places in the world1 the message of ,christ is necessary4 ,no one who lived in modern ,russia could possibly realise his perfection except by pain4 ,a few ,russian artists have realised themselves in ,art2 in a fiction that is medival in character1 because its dominant note is the realisation of men through suffering4 ,but for those who are not artists1 and to whom there is no mode of life but the actual life of fact1 pain is the only door to perfection4 ,a ,russian who lives happily under the present system of government in ,russia must either believe that man has no soul1 or that1 if he has1 it is not worth developing4 ,a ,nihilist who rejects all authority1 because he knows authority to be evil1 and welcomes all pain1 because through that he realises his personality1 is a real ,christian4 ,to him the ,christian ideal is a true thing4 ,and yet1 ,christ did not revolt against authority4 ,he accepted the imperial authority of the ,roman ,empire and paid tribute4 ,he endured the ecclesiastical authority of the ,jewish ,church1 and would not repel its violence by any violence of his own4 ,he had1 as ,i said before1 no scheme for the reconstruction of society4 ,but the modern world has schemes4 ,it proposes to do away with poverty and the suffering that it entails4 ,it desires to get rid of pain1 and the suffering that pain entails4 ,it trusts to ,socialism and to ,science as its methods4 ,what it aims at is an ,individualism expressing itself through joy4 ,this ,individualism will be larger1 fuller1 lovelier than any ,individualism has ever been4 ,pain is not the ultimate mode of perfection4 ,it is merely provisional and a protest4 ,it has reference to wrong1 unhealthy1 unjust surroundings4 ,when the wrong1 and the disease1 and the injustice are removed1 it will have no further place4 ,it will have done its work4 ,it was a great work1 but it is almost over4 ,its sphere lessens every day4 ,nor will man miss it4 ,for what man has sought for is1 indeed1 neither pain nor pleasure1 but simply ,life4 ,man has sought to live intensely1 fully1 perfectly4 ,when he can do so without exercising restraint on others1 or suffering it ever1 and his activities are all pleasurable to him1 he will be saner1 healthier1 more civilised1 more himself4 ,pleasure is ,nature's test1 her sign of approval4 ,when man is happy1 he is in harmony with himself and his environment4 ,the new ,individualism1 for whose service ,socialism1 whether it wills it or not1 is working1 will be perfect harmony4 ,it will be what the ,greeks sought for1 but could not1 except in ,thought1 realise completely1 because they had slaves1 and fed them2 it will be what the ,renaissance sought for1 but could not realise completely except in ,art1 because they had slaves1 and starved them4 ,it will be complete1 and through it each man will attain to his perfection4 ,the new ,individualism is the new ,hellenism4 99 99 99 99 99 ,reprinted from the #8,fortnightly ,review1' by permission of ,messrs ,chapman and ,hall4