PARTISAN REVIEW
Pritchett, too, I think, would agree with that, though perhaps
it was easier for Charlotte Bronte to believe that she had excluded
public interest than it is for us. Public interest in her day was surely
more separate from the private life: a debate in Parliament, a leading
article in the
Thunderer.
It did not so color the common life: with
us, however consciously unconcerned we are, it obtrudes through the
cracks of our stories, terribly persistent like grass through cement.
Processions can't help passing across the end of our imaginary streets:
our characters must earn a living: if they don't, what
is
called a so–
cial significance seems to attach itself to their not-earning. Correcting
proofs the other day, I had to read some old stories of mine dating
back to the early 'thirties. Already they seemed to have a period air.
It was not what I had intended.
"The relation of the artist to society": it's a terribly vague
subject, and I feel the same embarrassment ·and resentment as you do
when I encounter it. We all have to be citizens in our spare time,
standing in queues, filling up income tax forms, supporting our fam–
ilies: why can't we leave it at that? I think we need a devil's advocate
in this discussion to explain the whole thing to us. I picture him as
a member of the PEN Club, perhaps a little out of breath from his
conference in Stockholm where he has been discussing this very subject
(in prewar times he would have returned from the Adriatic--confer–
ences of this kind were never held where society was exactly
thick)
Before sitting down to add his signature to an appeal in
The Times
(in the 'thirties it would have proudly appeared with Mr. Forster's,
Mr. Betrand Russell's and perhaps Miss Maude Royden's), he would
find an opportunity to tell us what society
is
and what the artist.
I'm rather glad, all the same, we haven't got him with m.. His
letters confirmed the prejudice I felt against the artist (there the word
is again) indulging in public affairs. His letters-and those of his co–
signatories-always seemed to me either ill-informed, naive or un–
timely. There were so many petitions in favor of the victims of arbi–
trary power which helped to knot the noose round the poor creatures'
necks. So long as he had eased his conscience publicly in print, and in
good company, he was not concerned with the consequences of his
letter. No, I'm glad we've left him out. He will, of course, review
us.
We had better, however, agree on our terms, and as you have
1186
