BOOKS
639
abandon the image of Ru sse ll as the di sint eres ted campa igner for
human bell erment-and a t th e end , in th e Ban -th e- Bomb days, fo r
mere human surviva l. And even if there is somethin g true in the
adverse view of Ru ssell's life and work , it need no t be merely condem–
na tory. Russell 's lonely and affecti on-starved childhood, the ho thouse
a tmosphere of hi s educati on , th e seri ous ph ys ica l and nervous illness of
his ma turit y, no t to spea k o f la ter diffi culti es - a ll these would have to
be taken into account. But a sa tisfacto ry di scuss ion of Ru ssell would
have to bring out mo re cl ea rl y tha t h e is open to criti cism from a po int
of vi ew quite different from tha t of the bi go ts who prevented hi s
appointment a t th e City Coll ege of New Yo rk.
To put it ano th er way : the serious student o f Ru ssell must sooner
o r la ter confront and examin e cl osely the rh eto ri ca l side of Russe ll's
writin g, as in
Th e Free Man's Worsh ip
(as it was ori g ina ll y call ed ).
Th a t famo us d('cl a ra ti o n brin gs to mind th e di stincti on drawn by
Trilling between sin cerit y and authenti city. There is somethin g th a t
does no t rin g tru e about it. And though it may be unfa ir to usc a man 's
love letters aga in st him , th e same mu st be sa id abo ut man y passages
from them quo ted by Mr. Cl ark . No doubt Ru ssell was quite sincere in
cl a imin g thai he expcri enced height s o f ecs ta sy and depths of despa ir,
of raptur(' and bittcrn ess. But th ere is somethin g in hi s way of writin g
abo ut them that chills rath er than wa rms. It is no t CIl o ugh to show, as
Mr. Cl a rk does, th at th e popul a r image of him as a cyni cal ra tion a li st
o r eighteenth cenLury abbe is a ca ri ca ture. Th a t Bertrand Russell , with
a ll hi s dazzling g ifts. was no t a wh ole man , that in some import ant
regio ns he lacked self-kn ow ledge-thi s has been th e verdict towards
which Ru ssell 's mos t severe and seri ous criti cs hm'e inclin ed . Mr.
Cl ar k's trea tlll cnt would have been mo re arres tin g if he had g iven us
mo re help to invcs ti ga tc its justi ce.
It
is on th e publi c Ru ssell tha t thi s pa rti cul ar bi ograph er is mos t
illumin a ting, and he writes well on the shifts and compl exiti es o f
Russe ll 's a ltitudes to public affa irs. He gives much consideration, for
exampl e, to the di sputed question of whether Ru ssell advoca ted a
prevenLive war aga in st the Sovi et Union a fter World War II , and
whether he was altogeth er candid afterwards about wh at poli cy he had
actua ll y recommended at that time. Mr. Cl ark discusses also a t great
but no t unn ecessary leng th Russell' s rela tionship is hi s later years with
Ra lph Schoenman-Russell 's left-hand man , as a British journ alist
call ed him. H e prinLs a long memorandum on the ch aracter and
conduct of Schoenman , di cta ted by Ru ssell in 1969, which cannot but
excite our admira ti on fo r th e incisive prose and penetra tin g an alys is o f
