164 CULTURE AND SOCIETY

ART AND

SOCIETY 165 This

way, an

energetic entry^into commercialism in order toescape^itsconsequences,^isakindof

Moral

_Sinking

Fund, which

continues to

be

_heavily subscribed.

The

other

way

isthe

way

of 'minority^culture*:

Nothing made _by

man's

hand

can

be

indifferent: it

must be

either beautiful

and

elevating, or ugly

and

degrading;

and

those things thatare without artare so aggressively; they

wound

it

by

their existence,

and

they ^are

now

so

much

inthe majority ^thatthe

works

of art

we

are obliged ^{to set ourselves to} seek for,

whereas

the other_{things are}the ordinary

companions

ofour

everyday

life;so thatifthose

who

cultivateart intellectually

were

inclined never so

much

to

wrap

themselves in their special gifts

and

theirhigh ^culti vation,

and

solivehappily,apart

from

other

men, and

despising them, they could not

do

so: they ^{are as it}

were

_{living in}

an

_enemy'scountry; atevery turn^there

is

something

lying inwaittooffend

and

vextheir nicer sense

and

educatedeyes: they

must

shareinthe

gen

eraldiscomfort

and

I

am

glad^ofit.31

The

cultivated

were

indeed 'aliens', as

Arnold had

^called

them, but

they

were

_helpless to prevent ^further

damage, even

tothemselves. Fortyyears ofpublicized revival ofthe arts

had _shown,

Morris argued, not

an improvement

^inthe quality of things seen,

but even

a deterioration:

The world

is

everywhere growing

uglier

and more commonplace,

in spite oftheconscious

and

_verystren

uous

efforts ofa small

group

^of people towards the revival ofart,

which

aresoobviously out^ofjointwith the

tendency

^{of the}age, that while the uncultivated

have

not

even heard

ofthem, the

mass

ofthecultivated look

upon them

^asajoke,

^{and even}

^thattheyare

now beginning

^to get^tiredof.32

Art, Morris argued, ^{in line} withhis tradition,

depends on

the _{quality of} the _society

which

_produces ^it.

There

is

no

salvation in

art forart's sake

...

of (which) a school ^{. . .} does, in a

way,

theoretically at least, exist at present. ^Its

l66 CULTURE AND ^SOCIETY

watchword

(is) a piece ^of slang ^that does not

mean

the harmless thing^it

seems

to

mean

^{. . .}

An

art culti vated professedly

by

a few,

and

fora few,

who would

considerit

necessarya

duty,^ifthey could

admit du tiesto

despise the

common

herd, ^to

hold

^themselves aloof

from

allthat the

world

has

been

straggling for

from

the _first, to

guard

^{carefully every}

approach

^to theirpalace ^{of art}

...

that art at lastwill

seem

too delicate

a

_thingfor

even

the

hands

oftheinitiated to touch;

and

the initiated

must

atlast sit still

and do

nothing ^tothe _{grief of}

no

one.⁸³

The _hope

forart

was

^nothere,

but

inthebelief that the cause ofArtisthe causeofthe people. ^{. . .}

One day we

shall

win back

Art, that^is to say the pleasure oflife;

win back Art

_again toourdaily labour.⁸⁴ This, atthe

end

ofthe_century,is a_rejectionof the_special ization of 'Art'

which was common

^at its beginning.

But

the terms ofthe rejection are in part a ^{result of}the spe cialization.Inparticular,Morris_profits

from

Ruskin'sthink- ing

about

art

and

labour, as here:

Nothing

^should

be made _by man's

labour

which

isnot

worth making;

^or

which must be made _by

labour

de

grading^tothemakers. . . .

Simple

^{as that}proposition

is. . .it isadirectchallenge^tothedeatibtothe pres ent system ^oflabourin civilized countries. ^{. .} .

The aim

of art _(is) todestroy the curse^oflabour

by mak

ing

work

the pleasurable satisfaction of our

impulse towards

_energy,

and

_givingtothat

energy hope

^of

pro ducing something worth

^{theexercise.85}

Art had become

a _{particularquality} oflabour. Delightⁱⁿ

work had been

widely destroyed

by

^the

machine-system

^of production, but, Morris argued, ^it

was

the system, rather

than

the

machines

_{as such,}

which must be blamed.

Ifthe necessary reasonable

work be

of

a mechanical

land, I

must be _helped

to

do

it

by a machine,

^notto

cheapen my

labour,

but

so thatas little

time

as pos sible

may ^be

spent

upon

^it.

...

I

know

thatto

some

ABT AND

SOCIETY

iy

cultivatedpeople, people^of theartistic turnof

mind, machinery

^is particularly distasteful . . .

(but) ^itis the allowing

machines

to

be

our masters

and

not our servantsthat_{so injures}the beauty^oflife

nowadays.

^In other words, ^{it is} the token of the terrible crime

we

have

fallen into ofusing ourcontrol ofthe

powers

^of

Nature

forthe

purpose

of enslavingpeople,

we

care less

meantime

of

how much

_happiness

we

rob their lives of.36

That

Morris could feel like this is of considerable

impor

tance.

He was

himself a hand-craftsman,

and he had a

re spect

born from

_experience for

work

of that kind. In his

Utopian

writings, the

removal

of

machines from

_{the proc}

ess of

work

isoften emphasized. Yet the^reaction'Morris- handicrafts get^{rid of}the machines'isasmisleading^asthe reaction 'Ruskin Gothic mediaevalism*.

The

_regressiveele

ments

are presentin Morris, asthey

were

in

RusHn. These

elements seekto

compensate

^forthe difficultiesinthe

way

of practical realization of certainqualities of_life;

and be

causetheir functionis compensatory, they are^oftensenti mental. _Yet, although ^their reference is to the past, their

concern

is

with

the present

and

thefuture.

When we

stress, in Morris, the attachmentto handicrafts,

we

_{are,in part,}

rationalizing

an

uneasiness generated

by

^thescale

^{and na}

ture of his social criticism. Morris

wanted

the

end

of the capitalistsystem,

and

the institution of socialism, so that

men

could decideforthemselves

how

their

work

should

be

arranged,

and where _machinery was

appropriate. ^It

was

obviously convenient^to

many

^{ofhis readers,}

^and

^to

many

of Buskin's readers, to construe all this as a

campaign

^to

end

machine-production.

Such

a

campaign

^couldnever

be more than an

affectation,

but

it is less

compromising than

Morris's

campaign

^to

end

capitalism,

which

lands

one

di rectly inthe heat

and

bitterness of_politicalstruggle. ^{It is}

most

significant that Morris should

have been

diluted in this

way. The

dilution stresses

what

are reallythe

weaker

parts of ^his

work, and

neglects

what

is really strong

and

alive.

For my own

part, I

would

willingly lose

The Dream

of

John

Ball

and

theromanticsocialistsongs

and even News

i68 CULTURE AND

^SOCIETY

1780-1950

from Nowhere-

inall of

which

the

weaknesses

of Morris's general poetry^{are active}

and

_disabling,ifto

do

so

were

the price of retaining

and

_{getting people} ^toread such smaller things as

How we

_Live,

and How we _might

Live,

The Aims

of Art,Useful

Work

versus UselessToil,

and A

_Factoryasit

might

^be.

The _change

of

emphasis would

involve a

change

inMorris's status as

a

_writer,but

such

a

change

^iscritically inevitable.

There

is

more

life in the _lectures,

where one

feels thatthe

whole man

is

engaged

^{in the}writing,

than

in

any

^of the prose

and

verse romances.

These seem

so clearlythe

product

of a fragmentary consciousness ^{of that} very^stateofrnind

which

Morris

was

_{alwaystrying to}

ana

lyse. Morrisis afine politicalwriter, inthebroadest_sense,

and

^{it is}

on

that, finally, thathis reputation^{will rest.}

The

other

and

_largerpartof his_literary

work

bears witness only tothedisorder

which he

feltso acutely.

He was

not a

Hop

kins to

make

art

'when

the time

seemed

unpropitious'.

The

nearest_{figure to}him, ^{in his}

own

_century, isCobbett:

with

thepractice of visual instead of rural^artsasthecontrolling sanity

from which

the_{politicalinsights}sprang.

And

as

with

Cobbett,

we come

to accept theimpatience

and

the ritual swearing ^as the _{price of} the _vitality,

which

has its

own

Itremains to look _{briefly at} Morris's socialism, since ^it

grew

^{outofthe tradition}

^which we have been

examining.

He

isoften

mentioned by modern members

^ofthe

^Labour

Party,

but

_{usually in}termsthat suggest a very^limitedac quaintance

with

hisactual ideas.

He

is,for instance,

some

thing very ^different

from an

orthodox Fabian. Socialism, forhim,^isnot

merely

substituting business-like administration in the inter estsofthe public^forthe old

Whig ^muddle

^oflaissez-

faire

backed up by

^coercion.37

This

was

the socialism the utilitarians

had come

to,

but

Morris, always, applied^{to socialism} the

modes

of

judge ment which had been developed

ⁱⁿ oppositionto utilitari anism. _{This, for}example: Socialism

might

gain higher

wages and

shorter

working

^{hours for the}

ART AND

SOCIETY

l6g working men

themselves: industries

may ^{be worked} by

municipalities for the benefit

both

of producers

and

consumers. Working-people's houses

may ^{be im}

proved,

and

their

management

taken outofthe

hands

of

commercial

speculators. Inallthis I freely

admit a

great gain,

and am

_glad to see

schemes

tried

which would

leadto it.

But

_{great as the gain}

would

_be, the ultimate

good

^{ofit. . .}would,^Ithink,

depend on how such

reforms

were

_done; in

what

_spirit; orrather

what

else

was _being

done, while these

were

_goingon. ^{. . ,38} Thisis

a

familiarkindofargument,

from

the_tradition,

and

Morris confirmsitinitsusualterms:

The

_great

mass

of

what most

non-socialists at least consideratpresent^to

be

_socialism,

seems

to

me noth

ing

more than a machinery

of socialism,

which

Ithink

itprobable that socialism

must

useinitsmilitant

con

dition;

and which

I think it

may

^{use for}

^some

^time

afterit ispractically established;

but

doesnot

seem

to

me

to

be

ofits essence.³⁹

Yet

the result ofthis point ^of

view

is not modification of theSocialist idea,

but

its emphasis. Morris

wonders

whether,ⁱⁿshort,the

tremendous

organization of^civi lized

commercial

society ^is not playing the ^cat

and mouse game ^with

^us socialists.

Whether

the _Society ofInequality

might

not accept the quasi-socialist

ma

chinery

above

_mentioned,

and work

itforthe

purpose

of

upholding

that society ina

somewhat

shorn condi tion,

maybe, but a

^{safe one. . . .}

The

workersbetter treated, better organized, helping ^to

govern them

selves,

but with no more

pretenceto equality

with

the rich, nor

any more _hope

foritthan they

have now.

⁴⁰ This insight into

what

has

been

perhaps the^actualcourse of events since his deathis a

measure

of Morris's quality asa_politicalthinker.Yetitis

no more than an

application,

under new

circumstances, of the

kind

of appraisal

which

the _century's thinking about the

meanings

^{of culture}

had

made

available.

The

artsdefined aquality of living

which

it