Chapter VII: Part 7

One primary fault “C. L. D.” avoids almost entirely. He does not (as he might have done had he cared to take all the astonishing Latin words from Johnson’s Word-Book) load the dice by including in his list of “loan-words” words which we hardly ever use. There are a few. Only a scientist would say “acephalous” when he meant “headless”; and the general public does not need to be warned to say “grind,” “bristly,” “stalkless,” and “barefooted,” instead of “comminute,” “aristate,” “acaulescent,” and “discalced.” It would never dream of saying acaulescent. Where our author errs is where he would inevitably err: in suggesting to us (1) Saxon words which we simply won’t use, and (2) Saxon words which do not take the place of the Latin words of which he disapproves. Take, for instance, as an instance of the latter category, this very word “disapprove.” All he can give us is a list of “strong” words beginning with “hiss” and “hoot,” none of which gets the exact shade of meaning required. Similarly with “decry,” for which his suggestions are “boo” and “hoot.” In suggesting “clean,” “flat,” etc., for “absolute” he is merely booing and hooting the slang use of that word, but he has not found a Saxon equivalent for the real “absolute.” For “complimentary” he gives “smooth-spoken”; but how would, say, the Archbishop of Canterbury like to get a letter of thanks beginning: “My dear Archbishop,—Many thanks for your very smooth-spoken remarks”? For “uncomfortable” he can only suggest “writhing”—as though we could say that we had spent a fortnight in a most writhing hotel; and for “temporalities” he has nothing but “loaves and fishes”—which is simply offensive. If one began using words like these promiscuously, one would simply (here I consult the _Word-Book_ again) be asking for misluck.

To turn to the other lot, it is altogether too late to ask us to say “rede-craft” for “logic”; “back-jaw” for “retort”; “handmaid” for “servant”; “outganger” for “emigrant”; “wanhope” (a most beautiful word, I admit) for “despair”; “scald” or “songsmith” for “poet”; “hight” or “yclept” for “denominated”; “uplooking” for “aspiring”; “fourwinkled” for “quadrangular”; and, above all, to replace “depilatory” by “hair-bane.” “Ereold” and “foreold” for “ancient” are no longer possible; and the man who should say that the King was crowned and besmeared in Westminster Abbey would be quite unable to persuade people that he wasn’t merely a rather coarse satirist. In cases where both terms are alive, the Latin is often more convenient—because shorter—than the Saxon. If we always used “breach of wedlock” instead of “adultery,” many modern novels, and most Sunday newspapers, would use up twice as much paper and ink. (There was once a half-way word: the mediæval heralds used to say that the leopard was “begotten in spouse-breach between the lion and the pard.”) In proposing “hand-grip” for portmanteau, our wordloresman is doing an audacious thing: adopting a bit of modern American—though, as often as not, the term is shortened, across the water, to “grip” _tout court_.

There remain, of course, a very large number of words for which “C. L. D.” does provide genuine living synonyms which, in many cases, are stronger and terser than the originals. Even here, of course, there are occasional difficulties; we have, at any rate in print, thrown over “C. L. D.’s” favourites “belly-ache” and “gripes” in favour of “colic” simply because they _are_ what is called “good sturdy Saxon,” altogether too apt and sturdy. As for his proposal of “ropes” and “manifolds” for “intestines,” all I can say is that I much prefer here to remain under the Norman yoke. At the same time, too much Latinity is a nuisance and a danger to the vividness of our tongue; and, whilst refraining from following “C. L. D.” to his thorps or Barnes to his folk-wain, I think I shall sometimes find the _Word-Book_ useful.

On Destroying Books

“It says in the paper” that over two million volumes have been presented to the troops by the public. It would be interesting to inspect them. Most of them, no doubt, are quite ordinary and suitable; but it was publicly stated the other day that some people were sending the oddest things, such as magazines twenty years old, guides to the Lake District, Bradshaws, and back numbers of _Whitaker’s Almanack_. In some cases, one imagines, such indigestibles get into the parcels by accident; but it is likely that there are those who jump at the opportunity of getting rid of books they don’t want. Why have kept them if they don’t want them? But most people, especially non-bookish people, are very reluctant to throw away anything that looks like a book. In the most illiterate houses that one knows every worthless or ephemeral volume that is bought finds its way to a shelf and stays there. In reality it is not merely absurd to keep rubbish merely because it is printed: it is positively a public duty to destroy it. Destruction not merely makes more room for new books and saves one’s heirs the trouble of sorting out the rubbish or storing it: it may also prevent posterity from making a fool of itself. We may be sure that if we do not burn, sink, or blast all the superseded editions of Bradshaw, two hundred years hence some collector will be specializing in old railway timetables, gathering, at immense cost, a complete series, and ultimately leaving his “treasures” (as the Press will call them) to a Public Institution.

But it is not always easy to destroy books. They may not have as many lives as a cat, but they certainly die hard; and it is sometimes difficult to find a scaffold for them. This difficulty once brought me almost within the Shadow of the Rope. I was living in a small and (as Shakespeare would say) heaven-kissing flat in Chelsea, and books of inferior minor verse gradually accumulated there until at last I was faced with the alternative of either evicting the books or else leaving them in sole, undisturbed tenancy and taking rooms elsewhere for myself. Now, no one would have bought these books. I therefore had to throw them away or wipe them off the map altogether. But how? There were scores of them. I had no kitchen range, and I could not toast them on the gas-cooker or consume them leaf by leaf in my small study fire—for it is almost as hopeless to try to burn a book without opening it as to try to burn a piece of granite. I had no dustbin; my debris went down a kind of flue behind the staircase, with small trap-doors opening to the landings. The difficulty with this was that the larger books might choke it; the authorities, in fact, had labelled it “Dust and Ashes Only”; and in any case I did not want to leave the books intact, and some dustman’s unfortunate family to get a false idea of English poetry from them. So in the end I determined to do to them what so many people do to the kittens: tie them up and consign them to the river. I improvised a sack, stuffed the books into it, put it over my shoulder, and went down the stairs into the darkness.

It was nearly midnight as I stepped into the street. There was a cold nip in the air; the sky was full of stars; and the greenish-yellow lamps threw long gleams across the smooth, hard road. Few people were about; under the trees at the corner a Guardsman was bidding a robust good night to his girl, and here and there rang out the steps of solitary travellers making their way home across the bridge to Battersea. I turned up my overcoat collar, settled my sack comfortably across my shoulders, and strode off towards the little square glow of the coffee-stall which marked the near end of the bridge, whose sweeping iron girders were just visible against the dark sky behind. A few doors down I passed a policeman who was flashing his lantern on the catches of basement windows. He turned. I fancied he looked suspicious, and I trembled slightly. The thought occurred to me: “Perhaps he suspects I have swag in this sack.” I was not seriously disturbed, as I knew that I could bear investigation, and that nobody would be suspected of having stolen such goods (though they _were_ all first editions) as I was carrying. Nevertheless I could not help the slight unease which comes to all who are eyed suspiciously by the police, and to all who are detected in any deliberately furtive act, however harmless. He acquitted me, apparently; and, with a step that, making an effort, I prevented from growing more rapid, I walked on until I reached the Embankment.

It was then that all the implications of my act revealed themselves. I leaned against the parapet and looked down into the faintly luminous swirls of the river. Suddenly I heard a step near me; quite automatically I sprang back from the wall and began walking on with, I fervently hoped, an air of rumination and unconcern. The pedestrian came by me without looking at me. It was a tramp, who had other things to think about; and, calling myself an ass, I stopped again. “Now’s for it,” I thought; but just as I was preparing to cast my books upon the waters I heard another step—a slow and measured one. The next thought came like a blaze of terrible blue lightning across my brain: “What about the splash?” A man leaning at midnight over the Embankment wall: a sudden fling of his arms: a great splash in the water. Surely, and not without reason, whoever was within sight and hearing (and there always seemed to be some one near) would at once rush at me and seize me. In all probability they would think it was a baby. What on earth would be the good of telling a London constable that I had come out into the cold and stolen down alone to the river to get rid of a pack of poetry? I could almost hear his gruff, sneering laugh: “You tell that to the Marines, my son!”

So for I do not know how long I strayed up and down, increasingly fearful of being watched, summoning up my courage to take the plunge and quailing from it at the last moment. At last I did it. In the middle of Chelsea Bridge there are projecting circular bays with seats in them. In an agony of decision I left the Embankment and hastened straight for the first of these. When I reached it I knelt on the seat. Looking over, I hesitated again. But I had reached the turning-point. “What!” I thought savagely, “under the resolute mask that you show your friends is there really a shrinking and contemptible coward? If you fail now, you must never hold your head up again. Anyhow, what if you _are_ hanged for it? Good God! you worm, better men than you have gone to the gallows!” With the courage of despair I took a heave. The sack dropped sheer. A vast splash. Then silence fell again. No one came. I turned home; and as I walked I thought a little sadly of all those books falling into that cold torrent, settling slowly down through the pitchy dark, and subsiding at last on the ooze of the bottom, there to lie forlorn and forgotten whilst the unconscious world of men went on.

Horrible bad books, poor innocent books, you are lying there still; covered, perhaps, with mud by this time, with only a stray rag of your sacking sticking out of the slime into the opaque brown tides. Odes to Diana, Sonnets to Ethel, Dramas on the Love of Lancelot, Stanzas on a First Glimpse of Venice, you lie there in a living death, and your fate is perhaps worse than you deserved. I was harsh with you. I am sorry I did it. But even if I had kept you, I will certainly say this: I should not have sent you to the soldiers.

THE END