<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page91" id="page91"></SPAN></span>
<h2>CHAPTER X</h2>
<h2>BROAD COUNSELS</h2>
<p>I have now set down what appear to me to be the necessary considerations,
recommendations, exhortations, and dehortations in aid of this delicate and arduous
enterprise of forming the literary taste. I have dealt with the theory of literature,
with the psychology of the author, and—quite as important—with the
psychology of the reader. I have tried to explain the author to the reader and the
reader to himself. To go into further detail would be to exceed my original
intention, with no hope of ever bringing the constantly-enlarging scheme to a logical
conclusion. My aim is not to provide a map, but a compass—two very different
instruments. In the way of general advice it remains for me only to put before you
three counsels which <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page92" id="page92"></SPAN>[pg
92]</span> apply more broadly than any I have yet offered to the business of
reading.</p>
<p>You have within yourself a touchstone by which finally you can, and you must, test
every book that your brain is capable of comprehending. Does the book seem to you to
be sincere and true? If it does, then you need not worry about your immediate
feelings, or the possible future consequences of the book. You will ultimately like
the book, and you will be justified in liking it. Honesty, in literature as in life,
is the quality that counts first and counts last. But beware of your immediate
feelings. Truth is not always pleasant. The first glimpse of truth is, indeed,
usually so disconcerting as to be positively unpleasant, and our impulse is to tell
it to go away, for we will have no truck with it. If a book arouses your genuine
contempt, you may dismiss it from your mind. Take heed, however, lest you confuse
contempt with anger. If a book really moves you to anger, the chances are that it is
a good book. Most good books have begun by causing anger which <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page93" id="page93"></SPAN></span> disguised itself as
contempt. Demanding honesty from your authors, you must see that you render it
yourself. And to be honest with oneself is not so simple as it appears. One's
sensations and one's sentiments must be examined with detachment. When you have
violently flung down a book, listen whether you can hear a faint voice saying within
you: "It's true, though!" And if you catch the whisper, better yield to it as quickly
as you can. For sooner or later the voice will win. Similarly, when you are hugging a
book, keep your ear cocked for the secret warning: "Yes, but it isn't true." For bad
books, by flattering you, by caressing, by appealing to the weak or the base in you,
will often persuade you what fine and splendid books they are. (Of course, I use the
word "true" in a wide and essential significance. I do not necessarily mean true to
literal fact; I mean true to the plane of experience in which the book moves. The
truthfulness of <i>Ivanhoe</i>, for example, cannot be estimated by the same
standards as the truthfulness of Stubbs's <i>Constitutional History</i>.) In reading
a book, a <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page94" id="page94"></SPAN></span>
sincere questioning of oneself, "Is it true?" and a loyal abiding by the answer, will
help more surely than any other process of ratiocination to form the taste. I will
not assert that this question and answer are all-sufficient. A true book is not
always great. But a great book is never untrue.</p>
<p>My second counsel is: In your reading you must have in view some definite
aim—some aim other than the wish to derive pleasure. I conceive that to give
pleasure is the highest end of any work of art, because the pleasure procured from
any art is tonic, and transforms the life into which it enters. But the maximum of
pleasure can only be obtained by regular effort, and regular effort implies the
organisation of that effort. Open-air walking is a glorious exercise; it is the
walking itself which is glorious. Nevertheless, when setting out for walking
exercise, the sane man generally has a subsidiary aim in view. He says to himself
either that he will reach a given point, or that he will progress at a given speed
for a given <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page95" id="page95"></SPAN></span>
distance, or that he will remain on his feet for a given time. He organises his
effort, partly in order that he may combine some other advantage with the advantage
of walking, but principally in order to be sure that the effort shall be an adequate
effort. The same with reading. Your paramount aim in poring over literature is to
enjoy, but you will not fully achieve that aim unless you have also a subsidiary aim
which necessitates the measurement of your energy. Your subsidiary aim may be
æsthetic, moral, political, religious, scientific, erudite; you may devote
yourself to a man, a topic, an epoch, a nation, a branch of literature, an
idea—you have the widest latitude in the choice of an objective; but a definite
objective you must have. In my earlier remarks as to method in reading, I advocated,
without insisting on, regular hours for study. But I both advocate and insist on the
fixing of a date for the accomplishment of an allotted task. As an instance, it is
not enough to say: "I will inform myself completely as to the Lake School." It is
necessary to say: <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page96" id="page96"></SPAN>[pg
96]</span> "I will inform myself completely as to the Lake School before I am a year
older." Without this precautionary steeling of the resolution the risk of a
humiliating collapse into futility is enormously magnified.</p>
<p>My third counsel is: Buy a library. It is obvious that you cannot read unless you
have books. I began by urging the constant purchase of books—any books of
approved quality, without reference to their immediate bearing upon your particular
case. The moment has now come to inform you plainly that a bookman is, amongst other
things, a man who possesses many books. A man who does not possess many books is not
a bookman. For years literary authorities have been favouring the literary public
with wondrously selected lists of "the best books"—the best novels, the best
histories, the best poems, the best works of philosophy—or the hundred best or
the fifty best of all sorts. The fatal disadvantage of such lists is that they leave
out large quantities of literature which is admittedly first-class. The <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page97" id="page97"></SPAN></span> bookman cannot
content himself with a selected library. He wants, as a minimum, a library reasonably
complete in all departments. With such a basis acquired, he can afterwards wander
into those special byways of book-buying which happen to suit his special
predilections. Every Englishman who is interested in any branch of his native
literature, and who respects himself, ought to own a comprehensive and inclusive
library of English literature, in comely and adequate editions. You may suppose that
this counsel is a counsel of perfection. It is not. Mark Pattison laid down a rule
that he who desired the name of book-lover must spend five per cent. of his income on
books. The proposal does not seem extravagant, but even on a smaller percentage than
five the average reader of these pages may become the owner, in a comparatively short
space of time, of a reasonably complete English library, by which I mean a library
containing the complete works of the supreme geniuses, representative important works
of all the first-class men in all departments, <span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="page98" id="page98"></SPAN></span> and specimen works of all the men of the second rank
whose reputation is really a living reputation to-day. The scheme for a library,
which I now present, begins before Chaucer and ends with George Gissing, and I am
fairly sure that the majority of people will be startled at the total inexpensiveness
of it. So far as I am aware, no such scheme has ever been printed before.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />