<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0019" id="link2H_4_0019"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> WILLIAM AND MARY 1920. </h2>
<p>Memories, like olives, are an acquired taste. William and Mary (I give
them the Christian names that were indeed theirs—the joint title by
which their friends always referred to them) were for some years an
interest in my life, and had a hold on my affection. But a time came when,
though I had known and liked them too well ever to forget them, I gave
them but a few thoughts now and then. How, being dead, could they keep
their place in the mind of a young man surrounded with large and
constantly renewed consignments of the living? As one grows older, the
charm of novelty wears off. One finds that there is no such thing as
novelty—or, at any rate, that one has lost the faculty for
perceiving it. One sees every newcomer not as something strange and
special, but as a ticketed specimen of this or that very familiar genus.
The world has ceased to be remarkable; and one tends to think more and
more often of the days when it was so very remarkable indeed.</p>
<p>I suppose that had I been thirty years older when first I knew him,
William would have seemed to me little worthier of attention than a
twopenny postage-stamp seems to-day. Yet, no: William really had some
oddities that would have caught even an oldster’s eye. In himself he was
commonplace enough (as I, coeval though I was with him, soon saw). But in
details of surface he was unusual. In them he happened to be rather ahead
of his time. He was a socialist, for example. In 1890 there was only one
other socialist in Oxford, and he not at all an undergraduate, but a
retired chimney-sweep, named Hines, who made speeches, to which nobody,
except perhaps William, listened, near the Martyrs’ Memorial. And William
wore a flannel shirt, and rode a bicycle—very strange habits in
those days, and very horrible. He was said to be (though he was
short-sighted and wore glasses) a first-rate ‘back’ at football; but, as
football was a thing frowned on by the rowing men, and coldly ignored by
the bloods, his talent for it did not help him: he was one of the
principal pariahs of our College; and it was rather in a spirit of
bravado, and to show how sure of myself I was, that I began, in my second
year, to cultivate his acquaintance.</p>
<p>We had little in common. I could not think Political Economy ‘the most
exciting thing in the world,’ as he used to call it. Nor could I without
yawning listen to more than a few lines of Mr. William Morris’
interminable smooth Icelandic Sagas, which my friend, pious young
socialist that he was, thought ‘glorious.’ He had begun to write an
Icelandic Saga himself, and had already achieved some hundreds of verses.
None of these pleased him, though to me they seemed very like his
master’s. I can see him now, standing on his hearth-rug, holding his MS.
close to his short-sighted eyes, declaiming the verses and trying, with
many angular gestures of his left hand, to animate them—a tall,
broad, raw-boned fellow, with long brown hair flung back from his
forehead, and a very shabby suit of clothes. Because of his clothes and
his socialism, and his habit of offering beer to a guest, I had at first
supposed him quite poor; and I was surprised when he told me that he had
from his guardian (his parents being dead) an allowance of £350, and that
when he came of age he would have an income of £400. ‘All out of
dividends,’ he would groan. I would hint that Mr. Hines and similar
zealots might disembarrass him of this load, if he asked them nicely.
‘No,’ he would say quite seriously, ‘I can’t do that,’ and would read out
passages from ‘Fabian Essays’ to show that in the present anarchical
conditions only mischief could result from sporadic dispersal of rent.
‘Ten, twelve years hence—’ he would muse more hopefully. ‘But by
that time,’ I would say, ‘you’ll probably be married, and your wife
mightn’t quite—‘, whereat he would hotly repeat what he had said
many times: that he would never marry. Marriage was an anti-social
anachronism. I think its survival was in some part due to the machinations
of Capital. Anyway, it was doomed. Temporary civil contracts between men
and women would be the rule ‘ten, twelve years hence’; pending which time
the lot of any man who had civic sense must be celibacy, tempered perhaps
with free love.</p>
<p>Long before that time was up, nevertheless, William married. One afternoon
in the spring of ‘95 I happened to meet him at a corner of Cockspur
Street. I wondered at the immense cordiality of his greeting; for our
friendship, such as it was, had waned in our two final years at Oxford.
‘You look very flourishing, and,’ I said, ‘you’re wearing a new suit!’
‘I’m married,’ he replied, obviously without a twinge of conscience. He
told me he had been married just a month. He declared that to be married
was the most splendid thing in all the world; but he weakened the force of
this generalisation by adding that there never was any one like his wife.
‘You must see her,’ he said; and his impatience to show her proudly off to
some one was so evident, and so touching, that I could but accept his
invitation to go and stay with them for two or three days—‘why not
next week?’ They had taken and furnished ‘a sort of cottage’ in ——shire,
and this was their home. He had ‘run up for the day, on business—journalism’
and was now on his way to Charing Cross. ‘I know you’ll like my wife,’ he
said at parting. She’s—well, she’s glorious.’</p>
<p>As this was the epithet he had erst applied to ‘Beowulf’ and to ‘Sigurd
the Volsung’ it raised no high hopes. And indeed, as I was soon to find,
he had again misused it. There was nothing glorious about his bride. Some
people might even have not thought her pretty. I myself did not, in the
flash of first sight. Neat, insignificant, pleasing, was what she appeared
to me, rather than pretty, and far rather than glorious. In an age of
fringes, her brow was severely bare. She looked ‘practical.’ But an
instant later, when she smiled, I saw that she was pretty, too. And
presently I thought her delightful. William had met me in a ‘governess
cart,’ and we went to see him unharness the pony. He did this in a
fumbling, experimental way, confusing the reins with the traces, and
profiting so little by his wife’s directions that she began to laugh. And
her laugh was a lovely thing; quite a small sound, but exquisitely clear
and gay, coming in a sequence of notes that neither rose nor fell, that
were quite even; a trill of notes, and then another, and another, as
though she were pulling repeatedly a little silver bell... As I describe
it, perhaps the sound may be imagined irritating. I can only say it was
enchanting.</p>
<p>I wished she would go on laughing; but she ceased, she darted forward and
(William standing obediently aside, and I helping unhelpfully) unharnessed
the pony herself, and led it into its small stable. Decidedly, she was
‘practical,’ but—I was prepared now to be lenient to any quality she
might have.</p>
<p>Had she been feckless, no doubt I should have forgiven her that, too; but
I might have enjoyed my visit less than I did, and might have been less
pleased to go often again. I had expected to ‘rough it’ under William’s
roof. But everything thereunder, within the limits of a strict Arcadian
simplicity, was well-ordered. I was touched, when I went to my bedroom, by
the precision with which the very small maid had unpacked and disposed my
things. And I wondered where my hostess had got the lore she had so
evidently imparted. Certainly not from William. Perhaps (it only now
strikes me) from a handbook. For Mary was great at handbooks. She had
handbooks about gardening, and others about poultry, and one about ‘the
stable,’ and others on cognate themes. From these she had filled up the
gaps left in her education by her father, who was a widower and either a
doctor or a solicitor—I forget which—in one of the smallest
towns of an adjoining county. And I daresay she may have had, somewhere
hidden away, a manual for young hostesses. If so, it must have been a good
one. But to say this is to belittle Mary’s powers of intuition. It was
they, sharpened by her adoration of William, and by her intensity for
everything around him, that made her so efficient a housewife.</p>
<p>If she possessed a manual for young house-hunters it was assuredly not by
the light of this that she had chosen the home they were installed in. The
‘sort of cottage’ had been vacant for many years—an unpromising and
ineligible object, a mile away from a village, and three miles away from a
railway station. The main part of it was an actual cottage, of
seventeenth-century workmanship; but a little stuccoed wing had been added
to each side of it, in 1850 or thereabouts, by an eccentric old gentleman
who at that time chose to make it his home. He had added also the small
stable, a dairy, and other appanages. For these, and for garden, there was
plenty of room, as he had purchased and enclosed half an acre of the
surrounding land Those two stuccoed, very Victorian wings of his, each
with a sash-window above and a French window below, consorted queerly with
the old red brick and the latticed panes. And the long wooden veranda that
he had invoked did not unify the trinity. But one didn’t want it to. The
wrongness had a character all its own. The wrongness was right—at
any rate after Mary had hit on it for William. As a spinster, she would, I
think, have been happiest in a trim modern villa. But it was a belief of
hers that she had married a man of strange genius. She had married him for
himself, not for his genius; but this added grace in him was a thing to be
reckoned with, ever so much; a thing she must coddle to the utmost in a
proper setting. She was a year older than he (though, being so small and
slight, she looked several years younger), and in her devotion the
maternal instinct played a great part. William, as I have already conveyed
to you, was not greatly gifted. Mary’s instinct, in this one matter, was
at fault. But endearingly, rightly at fault. And, as William was outwardly
odd, wasn’t it well that his home should be so, too? On the inside,
comfort was what Mary always aimed at for him, and achieved.</p>
<p>The ground floor had all been made one room, into which you stepped
straight from the open air. Quite a long big room (or so it seemed, from
the lowness of the ceiling), and well-freshened in its antiquity, with
rush-mats here and there on the irregular red tiles, and very white
whitewash on the plaster between the rafters. This was the dining-room,
drawing-room, and general focus throughout the day, and was called simply
the Room. William had a ‘den’ on the ground floor of the left wing; and
there, in the mornings, he used to write a great deal. Mary had no special
place of her own: her place was wherever her duties needed her. William
wrote reviews of books for the Daily —. He did also creative work.
The vein of poetry in him had worked itself out—or rather, it
expressed itself for him in Mary. For technical purposes, the influence of
Ibsen had superseded that of Morris. At the time of my first visit, he was
writing an extraordinarily gloomy play about an extraordinarily unhappy
marriage. In subsequent seasons (Ibsen’s disc having been somehow eclipsed
for him by George Gissing’s) he was usually writing novels in which every
one—or do I exaggerate?—had made a disastrous match. I think
Mary’s belief in his genius had made him less diffident than he was at
Oxford. He was always emerging from his den, with fresh pages of MS., into
the Room. ‘You don’t mind?’ he would say, waving his pages, and then would
shout ‘Mary!’ She was always promptly forthcoming—sometimes from the
direction of the kitchen, in a white apron, sometimes from the garden, in
a blue one. She never looked at him while he read. To do so would have
been lacking in respect for his work. It was on this that she must
concentrate her whole mind, privileged auditor that she was. She sat
looking straight before her, with her lips slightly compressed, and her
hands folded on her lap. I used to wonder that there had been that first
moment when I did not think her pretty. Her eyes were of a very light
hazel, seeming all the lighter because her hair was of so dark a brown;
and they were beautifully set in a face of that ‘pinched oval’ kind which
is rather rare in England. Mary as listener would have atoned to me for
any defects there may have been in dear old William’s work. Nevertheless,
I sometimes wished this work had some comic relief in it. Publishers, I
believe, shared this wish; hence the eternal absence of William’s name
from among their announcements. For Mary’s sake, and his, I should have
liked him to be ‘successful.’ But at any rate he didn’t need money. He
didn’t need, in addition to what he had, what he made by his journalism.
And as for success—well, didn’t Mary think him a genius? And wasn’t
he Mary’s husband? The main reason why I wished for light passages in what
he read to us was that they would have been cues for Mary’s laugh. This
was a thing always new to me. I never tired of that little bell-like
euphony; those funny little lucid and level trills.</p>
<p>There was no stint of that charm when William was not reading to us. Mary
was in no awe of him, apart from his work, and in no awe at all of me: she
used to laugh at us both, for one thing and another—just the same
laugh as I had first heard when William tried to unharness the pony. I
cultivated in myself whatever amused her in me; I drew out whatever amused
her in William; I never let slip any of the things that amused her in
herself. ‘Chaff’ is a great bond; and I should have enjoyed our bouts of
it even without Mary’s own special obbligato. She used to call me (for I
was very urban in those days) the Gentleman from London. I used to call
her the Brave Little Woman. Whatever either of us said or did could be
twisted easily into relation to those two titles; and our bouts, to which
William listened with a puzzled, benevolent smile, used to cease only
because Mary regarded me as a possible purveyor of what William, she was
sure, wanted and needed, down there in the country, alone with her:
intellectual conversation, after his work. She often, I think, invented
duties in garden or kitchen so that he should have this stimulus, or
luxury, without hindrance. But when William was alone with me it was about
her that he liked to talk, and that I myself liked to talk too. He was
very sound on the subject of Mary; and so was I. And if, when I was alone
with Mary, I seemed to be sounder than I was on the subject of William’s
wonderfulness, who shall blame me?</p>
<p>Had Mary been a mother, William’s wonderfulness would have been less
greatly important. But he was her child as well as her lover. And I think,
though I do not know, she believed herself content that this should always
be, if so it were destined. It was not destined so. On the first night of
a visit I paid them in April, 1899, William, when we were alone, told me
news. I had been vaguely conscious, throughout the evening, of some
change; conscious that Mary had grown gayer, and less gay—somehow
different, somehow remote. William said that her child would be born in
September, if all went well. ‘She’s immensely happy,’ he told me. I
realised that she was indeed happier than ever... ‘And of course it would
be a wonderful thing, for both of us,’ he said presently, ‘to have a son—or
a daughter.’ I asked him which he would rather it were, a son or a
daughter. ‘Oh, either,’ he answered wearily. It was evident that he had
misgivings and fears. I tried to reason him out of them. He did not, I am
thankful to say, ever let Mary suspect them. She had no misgivings. But it
was destined that her child should live only for an hour, and that she
should die in bearing it.</p>
<p>I had stayed again at the cottage in July, for some days. At the end of
that month I had gone to France, as was my custom, and a week later had
written to Mary. It was William that answered this letter, telling me of
Mary’s death and burial. I returned to England next day. William and I
wrote to each other several times. He had not left his home. He stayed
there, ‘trying,’ as he said in a grotesque and heart-rending phrase, ‘to
finish a novel.’ I saw him in the following January. He wrote to me from
the Charing Cross Hotel, asking me to lunch with him there. After our
first greetings, there was a silence. He wanted to talk of—what he
could not talk of. We stared helplessly at each other, and then, in the
English way, talked of things at large. England was engaged in the Boer
War. William was the sort of man whom one would have expected to be
violently Pro-Boer. I was surprised at his fervour for the stronger side.
He told me he had tried to enlist, but had been rejected on account of his
eyesight. But there was, he said, a good chance of his being sent out,
almost immediately, as one of the Daily —‘s special correspondents.
‘And then,’ he exclaimed, ‘I shall see something of it.’ I had a
presentiment that he would not return, and a belief that he did not want
to return. He did not return. Special correspondents were not so carefully
shepherded in that war as they have since been. They were more at liberty
to take risks, on behalf of the journals to which they were accredited.
William was killed a few weeks after he had landed at Cape Town.</p>
<p>And there came, as I have said, a time when I did not think of William and
Mary often; and then a time when I did more often think of them. And
especially much did my mind hark back to them in the late autumn of last
year; for on the way to the place I was staying at I had passed the little
railway station whose name had always linked itself for me with the names
of those two friends. There were but four intervening stations. It was not
a difficult pilgrimage that I made some days later—back towards the
past, for that past’s sake and honour. I had thought I should not remember
the way, the three miles of way, from the station to the cottage; but I
found myself remembering it perfectly, without a glance at the
finger-posts. Rain had been falling heavily, driving the late leaves off
the trees; and everything looked rather sodden and misty, though the sun
was now shining. I had known this landscape only in spring, summer, early
autumn. Mary had held to a theory that at other seasons I could not be
acclimatised. But there were groups of trees that I knew, even without
their leaves; and farm-houses and small stone bridges that had not at all
changed. Only what mattered was changed. Only what mattered was gone.
Would what I had come to see be there still? In comparison with what it
had held, it was not much. But I wished to see it, melancholy spectacle
though it must be for me if it were extant, and worse than melancholy if
it held something new. I began to be sure it had been demolished, built
over. At the corner of the lane that had led to it, I was almost minded to
explore no further, to turn back. But I went on, and suddenly I was at the
four-barred iron gate, that I remembered, between the laurels. It was
rusty, and was fastened with a rusty padlock, and beyond it there was
grass where a winding ‘drive’ had been. From the lane the cottage never
had been visible, even when these laurels were lower and sparser than they
were now. Was the cottage still standing? Presently, I climbed over the
gate, and walked through the long grass, and—yes, there was Mary’s
cottage; still there; William’s and Mary’s cottage. Trite enough, I have
no doubt, were the thoughts that possessed me as I stood gazing. There is
nothing new to be thought about the evanescence of human things; but there
is always much to be felt about it by one who encounters in his maturity
some such intimate instance and reminder as confronted me, in that cold
sunshine, across that small wilderness of long rank wet grass and weeds.</p>
<p>Incredibly woebegone and lonesome the house would have looked even to one
for whom it contained no memories; all the more because in its utter
dereliction it looked so durable. Some of the stucco had fallen off the
walls of the two wings; thick flakes of it lay on the discoloured roof of
the veranda, and thick flakes of it could be seen lying in the grass
below. Otherwise, there were few signs of actual decay. The sash-window
and the French window of each wing were shuttered, and, from where I was
standing, the cream-coloured paint of those shutters behind the glass
looked almost fresh. The latticed windows between had all been boarded up
from within. The house was not to be let perish soon.</p>
<p>I did not want to go nearer to it; yet I did go nearer, step by step,
across the wilderness, right up to the edge of the veranda itself, and
within a yard of the front-door.</p>
<p>I stood looking at that door. I had never noticed it in the old days, for
then it had always stood open. But it asserted itself now, master of the
threshold.</p>
<p>It was a narrow door—narrow even for its height, which did not
exceed mine by more than two inches or so; a door that even when it was
freshly painted must have looked mean. How much meaner now, with its paint
all faded and mottled, cracked and blistered! It had no knocker, not even
a slit for letters. All that it had was a large-ish key-hole. On this my
eyes rested; and presently I moved to it, stooped down to it, peered
through it. I had a glimpse of—darkness impenetrable.</p>
<p>Strange it seemed to me, as I stood back, that there the Room was, the
remembered Room itself, separated from me by nothing but this unremembered
door...and a quarter of a century, yes. I saw it all, in my mind’s eye,
just as it had been: the way the sunlight came into it through this same
doorway and through the lattices of these same four windows; the way the
little bit of a staircase came down into it, so crookedly yet so
confidently; and how uneven the tiled floor was, and how low the rafters
were, and how littered the whole place was with books brought in from his
den by William, and how bright with flowers brought in by Mary from her
garden. The rafters, the stairs, the tiles, were still existing,
changeless in despite of cobwebs and dust and darkness, all quite
changeless on the other side of the door, so near to me. I wondered how I
should feel if by some enchantment the door slowly turned on its hinges,
letting in light. I should not enter, I felt, not even look, so much must
I hate to see those inner things lasting when all that had given to them a
meaning was gone from them, taken away from them, finally. And yet, why
blame them for their survival? And how know that nothing of the past ever
came to them, revisiting, hovering? Something—sometimes—perhaps?
One knew so little. How not be tender to what, as it seemed to me, perhaps
the dead loved?</p>
<p>So strong in me now was the wish to see again all those things, to touch
them and, as it were, commune with them, and so queerly may the mind be
wrought upon in a solitude among memories, that there were moments when I
almost expected that the door would obey my will. I was recalled to a
clearer sense of reality by something which I had not before noticed. In
the door-post to the right was a small knob of rusty iron—mocking
reminder that to gain admission to a house one does not ‘will’ the door:
one rings the bell—unless it is rusty and has quite obviously no one
to answer it; in which case one goes away. Yet I did not go away. The
movement that I made, in despite of myself, was towards the knob itself.
But, I hesitated, suppose I did what I half meant to do, and there were no
sound. That would be ghastly. And surely there would be no sound. And if
sound there were, wouldn’t that be worse still? My hand drew back,
wavered, suddenly closed on the knob. I heard the scrape of the wire—and
then, from somewhere within the heart of the shut house, a tinkle.</p>
<p>It had been the weakest, the puniest of noises. It had been no more than
is a fledgling’s first attempt at a twitter. But I was not judging it by
its volume. Deafening peals from steeples had meant less to me than that
one single note breaking the silence—in there. In there, in the
dark, the bell that had answered me was still quivering, I supposed, on
its wire. But there was no one to answer it, no footstep to come hither
from those recesses, making prints in the dust. Well, I could answer it;
and again my hand closed on the knob, unhesitatingly this time, pulling
further. That was my answer; and the rejoinder to it was more than I had
thought to hear—a whole quick sequence of notes, faint but clear,
playful, yet poignantly sad, like a trill of laughter echoing out of the
past, or even merely out of this neighbouring darkness. It was so like
something I had known, so recognisable and, oh, recognising, that I was
lost in wonder. And long must I have remained standing at that door, for I
heard the sound often, often. I must have rung again and again,
tenaciously, vehemently, in my folly.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />