Roughly speaking, there are three kinds of people in this world. The first kind
of people are People; they are the largest and probably the most valuable
class. We owe to this class the chairs we sit down on, the clothes we wear,
the houses we live in; and, indeed (when we come to think of it), we probably
belong to this class ourselves. The second class may be called for convenience
the Poets; they are often a nuisance to their families, but, generally
speaking, a blessing to mankind. The third class is that of the Professors or
Intellectuals; sometimes described as the thoughtful people; and these are a
blight and a desolation both to their families and also to mankind. Of course,
the classification sometimes overlaps, like all classification. Some good
people are almost poets and some bad poets are almost professors. But the
division follows lines of real psychological cleavage. I do not offer it
lightly. It has been the fruit of more than eighteen minutes of earnest reflection
and research.
The class called People (to which you and I, with no little pride, attach
ourselves) has certain casual, yet profound, assumptions, which are called “commonplaces,”
as that children are charming, or that twilight is sad and sentimental, or that
one man fighting three is a fine sight. Now, these feelings are not crude; they
are not even simple. The charm of children is very subtle; it is even complex,
to the extent of being almost contradictory. It is, at its very plainest,
mingled of a regard for hilarity and a regard for helplessness. The sentiment
of twilight, in the vulgarest drawing-room song or the coarsest pair of sweethearts,
is, so far as it goes, a subtle sentiment. It is strangely balanced between pain
and pleasure; it might also be called pleasure tempting pain. The plunge of
impatient chivalry by which we all admire a man fighting odds is not at all
easy to define separately, it means many things, pity, dramatic surprise, a
desire for justice, a delight in experiment and the indeterminate. The ideas
of the mob are really very subtle ideas; but the mob does not express them
subtly. In fact, it does not express them at all, except on those occasions (now
only too rare) when it indulges in insurrection and massacre.
Now, this accounts for the otherwise unreasonable fact of the existence of
Poets. Poets are those who share these popular sentiments, but can so express
them that they prove themselves the strange and delicate things that they
really are. Poets draw out the shy refinement of the rabble...The
Poets carry the popular sentiments to a keener and more splendid pitch; but let
it always be remembered that it is the popular sentiments that they are
carrying. No man ever wrote any good poetry to show that childhood was
shocking, or that twilight was gay and farcical, or that a man was contemptible
because he had crossed his single sword with three. The people who maintain
this are the Professors, or Prigs.
The Poets are those who rise above the people by understanding them. Of course,
most of the Poets wrote in prose — Rabelais, for instance, and Dickens. The
Prigs rise above the people by refusing to understand them: by saying that all
their dim, strange preferences are prejudices and superstitions. The Prigs make
the people feel stupid; the Poets make the people feel wiser than they could
have imagined that they were. There are many weird elements in this situation.
The oddest of all perhaps is the fate of the two factors in practical politics.
The Poets who embrace and admire the people are often pelted with stones and
crucified. The Prigs who despise the people are often loaded with lands and
crowned. In the House of Commons, for instance, there are quite a number of
prigs, but comparatively few poets. There are no People there at all.
By poets, as I have said, I do not mean people who write poetry, or indeed
people who write anything. I mean such people as, having culture and
imagination, use them to understand and share the feelings of their fellows; as
against those who use them to rise to what they call a higher plane. Crudely,
the poet differs from the mob by his sensibility; the professor differs from
the mob by his insensibility. He has not sufficient finesse and sensitiveness
to sympathise with the mob. His only notion is coarsely to contradict it, to
cut across it, in accordance with some egotistical plan of his own; to tell himself
that, whatever the ignorant say, they are probably wrong. He forgets that
ignorance often has the exquisite intuitions of innocence.
-Alarms and Discursions (1910)
Mike, I'm just coming back from a long and dry stint of a hectic schedule that has prevented me from reading any Chesterton--and this is SUCH a breath of fresh air!! Thank you for keeping up this blog for so long! Now I can finally get my daily dose of GKC back! :)
ReplyDeleteThanks! :-)
ReplyDeleteAnd hopefully you'll be able to start posting again as well....(*hint*) lol.