|
T. E. Lawrence, 'The Wells Short Stories'
The Collected Short Stories of H. G. Wells
(Benn, 7s. 6d.)
The Spectator, 25 February 1928
One thousand one hundred and fifty pages of H. G. Wells's short stories
for 7s. 6d. It is amazing value for money. Probably they are renumbered
stereos of another edition, otherwise Messrs. Benn could hardly have
done it. It is nearly as difficult to see how Wells did it. In this
collection are sixty-three stories, none negligible, some very long. My
memory vaguely suggests to me others not here included. Besides this
decent life-output for a short-story writer Wells has the achievement
of his massive History, and a shelf of novels, and miscellaneous
prose-work, literary or political. His drafts would tell us if this
huge production is due to industry or to a happy fluency. His writings
let us into so many workshops and laboratories that we would like
to see his own.
This sudden bulk of tales seems a chance to distinguish
the profile of H.G. Wells, the prose artist. In his mature novels
we cannot see the writer for the dust of his manly activities. He
preaches and argues and attacks, has theories and practical programmes,
tries to get something done. This role of politician and sociologist
he imposes upon the primal artist. Indeed, he spares little admiration
for pure writing, which he thinks a fad of emasculate amateurs. Yet
he cannot keep out of his work that secret rhythm which its sentences
(bare of relative clauses, and dependents, and adjectives, and
participles)
hold somewhere in this structure. So that any person with an ear
and knowledge of letters, after about six lines, says 'Wells,'
and is right every time. At his highest he writes magnificently;
and deliberately always; never falling below adequacy: only the
stuff of the novels is too contentious to show us a clean edge. In
these shorter pieces he is determined to entertain and to relieve
his imagination of a burdening idea: there is no ephemeral moral
underlying them.
It would be scientific to date each tale, and consider
Wells as a growth, like an oak-tree. The publishers have grouped
them, irrelevantly, to give their bulk palatable variety. If we undo
their work, and classify each sort apart, we are in a position to
examine the complete phenomenon of H.G. where he stands full-high, as an
entertainer. Then we see at once that the futurities -
those jugglings with the time-sense for which he is very famous -
are only a scrap of his collection. There are five such stories,
depending primarily on the time-sense, and three others into which
it enters. Not much, in sixty-three. There are only four stories
radically concerned with mechanisms, another notorious side of his
invention. To me this quantitative insignificance of his most reputed
side came as a shock. Nor did these seem his very good stories. They
date. Man-made things grow queer to our eyes, sooner than the queer
shapes of ourselves. Wells lasts better where he deals with human
nature, which varies as slowly as the structure of men's bodies. The
best of us would be as good (after a year's apprenticeship) as the
best Cro-Magnon men, if our time were suddenly put back.
The next thing to come out, overwhelmingly, was the
standpoint of the student of biology. The trend or evidence of science
everywhere obsesses the mind which wrote: but it is a humble mind,
prepared to hold everything as possible - the genuine, unmixed
humility of the student-investigator on the threshold of science. There
is not a trace of the professional mood and no presumption of deep
knowledge. There are five stories which declare themselves aloud
as the trial or apprenticeship pieces of the laboratory student
beginning
to write, with the materials provided by his class-rooms and text-books.
Only,
as it happens, they are not his first work!
A true-blue biologist would see man only in his place
in nature. Wells must have been engrossed in the problems of personality
before he came to study science. Five of these stories deal with
aberrations of personality. Aberrations - yes: but not one queer
man amongst them. His queerest things are done by ordinary people. Six
stories deal intensely with Nature, the Huxleian Nature: only H.G.
is an alienist among biologists. For him the aberrations of Nature, its
sports and freaks, its violent rejections of the norm - these
are the fascinations.
The student of life shifts his gaze from the eye-piece
of his microscope to universal nature. Six stories deal with
world-exchanging,
with transmutations of spheres or entities. In them the author is
heavy with material, and takes a very long time to get off the ground.
He
has not the nature to be happy in blind space. He cannot be tremendous.
He
likes to anchor his strangenesses to some familiarity, to make concrete
his vision by focusing it on the light outlining the back of a woolly
rhinoceros, on the control levers of an indescribable machine. Yet
he does not really describe even the levers, he makes us think he
has described them. The method slips into the grotesque in his
sub-oceanic
story 'In the Abyss.' Perhaps his own imagining is not often
very strange and he feels uneasy when he loses sight, for long, of
earth and pavements.
Thirty-one stories, so far: and he has finished
with the stars. Half of this collection is of the earth and of mankind,
familiar. In them he is on common ground with his peers; and we
look eagerly for adherences and affiliations. In two instances there
is a trace of Wilde; and here and there a little of the Yellow
Book carefulness of step. Good schools of prose, these, for a
man having no preoccupation with the graceful; who does not even,
like Butler, try to say his say at its very plainest. Later there
is a hint of Kipling, and two essays in the fatuous which remind me
of Three Men in a Boat; but these reflections are not the manner
- Wells remains an integer as stylist - but a situation
or setting. He has never belonged for more than a moment to fashion
or movement or clique. What a panorama, what diversity of literary
modes fill the backward gaze of a man who began writing in the end
of the eighties, and is still a producing artist, with the mind yet
unfixed, to-day! Homer was more near to Peisistratus than 1886 to
us.
Of these thirty-two entertainments twelve seem to
be just entertainments. Perhaps no one else could have written them;
but perhaps it would not have mattered if Wells had been lazy on their
day. Six others partake of the age of overseas adventure, which followed
the decline of Kipling. They are excellent. Three or four throw
a passing glance at magic, that toy for tired intellects. One story,
'The Door in the Wall,' is a very lovely thing, and seems rather by
itself - like a gloss on an E.M. Forster fragment.
'An intimation of beauty,' say the publishers:
half the tales deserve that heading. See, for example, how horror
flowers under Wells's hands. There are six stories of the succession
of Poe: they are too good to be called Grand Guignol, so compact
are they with painful beauty and strength and passion: 'The Cone,' 'The
Reconciliation,' 'The Lord of the Dynamos.' Besides
these are a few parables, for a quiet close to the set. One is a
satire, not very acute; another, 'The Pearl of Love,' seems
to me a fancy to be proud of. Its full cup of sentiment does not
brim over, nor its rich prose become precious.
In such analysis of the forms of these sixty-three
stories the grave rare comeliness which is their common denominator
has been neglected; and Wells himself, the writer, has slipped through
the meshes of my thinking. Always he does. We take for granted so
above-board a man. He seems to show himself fully, and we forget
he is only showing us what he pleases. Generalizations about H.G.
must needs be tentative; for they cannot be maintained against
challenge.
As regards his characters, the greatest in this volume
is 'I,' who colours the whole with himself. There seems not
one queer soul in the sixty-three. Wells deals more with events
and externals than with motives, and uses lay figures as pegs for
his costumes. It is easier to arrange the necessary incidents on a stock
character - a character which the author has used so often
that he need not explain it to himself or to his readers. Wells sees
his men as a part of things, and is tempted to make matter as mobile
as man. He knows that there is no wonder in the machinery of the
senses, but only incompleteness in them. His descriptive work lacks
colour. The sense he most calls upon is the visual one. Yet his
exactest picture will not make into a drawing. The generalness of
his landscape is surprising. You don't catch breath with 'That's Surrey,
that's its picture.' The bay on page 355 might be Devon
or California, or Malaya. You can feel it, and yourself in it, but
it does not take hold of you with any sharpness of its own. Probably
Wells would remove, as a blemish, any detail which did take the reader's
attention from the business of the story. He is wonderfully adequate,
as craftsman, over all his unexampled range. For exact subordination of
means few English writers better earn the attribute classical -
in respect to his short stories. In the novels, his men and women
sometimes mutiny and exceed his plan: it was nearly inevitable with
the fierceness of characterization demanded by the novel of twenty
years ago.
He angles throughout for a wide public. To most
writers, after their beginning book, there comes this fork in the road - whether to care first for what is to be bound between their
covers, or for the suffrages of all the people outside. Wells would
not have us think him interested in form (though incidentally an
invisible
H.G. takes good care of what Mr. Wells would disregard), and his
characters
are meant to mean something to most people. Not for him the lofty
solitary soul, but the gregarious fellow, clubbable either in pub
or in Athenaeum. The tales have almost no recognizable women. They
are not touched in, except for Elizabeth in 'The Days to Come.'
Yet
even Elizabeth you would not know in the street, as you know Altiora
Bailey.
Doubtless it is deliberate, this drawing upon the
untapped resources of the readers' minds. It saves space in development.
The
sudden subtlety of a plain-faced man is like to be overwhelming. Wells
will operate for pages in a quietude as fine as Jane Austen's, and
suddenly fling in a rarity, like a whale's bulla, and make
it justify tragedy. Yet even the tragedy is controlled.
Perhaps in the end we should come back to his student
ambitions for the secret of Wells's individuality as a short-story
writer. The interest in biology has mated happily with his concern
for the mass of human nature to make him a general practitioner in
the diseases of creation: his consciousness of life as an organism
has made him the cosmic doctor. One-third of this volume is extracted
from the case-book of his practice and details the patients' ills
and treatment: aberrations of nature, of matter, of personality. There
is a complete absence of quackery and of specialist absorption. Alienist
was, perhaps, too strong a word for him, since for alienists often
no normal man exists: whereas Wells is sure of the sane core within
his creation.
C.D.

|
|