DEMOCRACY UNDER REVISION

New Zealand Listener, Volume 15, Issue 380, 4 October 1946, Page 12

DEMOCRACY UNDER REVISION

J] HOUGH H. G. Wells is dead, what he did and said (and of course, wrote) still has news value-even after a,lapse of 19 years, as in the case of his Sorbonne lecture in 1927 on the subject of "Democracy Under Revision." This account of the lecture and the lecturer has been written for "The Listener" by a New Zealander who was present on that occasion-UNA D. SCOTT, M.A., Diplome de lenseignement des professeurs de francais a l’étranger (Sorbonne).

HILE a student in Paris at the Sorbonne, I received an invitation to hear a lecture on Democracy by H. G. Wells. In London I had heard Shaw, Chesterton, Belloc, and other writers of our day, but as H. G. Wells rarely appeared on public platform, this was an opportunity not to be missed. Wells referred later to this invitation to speak at the Sorbonne as "the highest distinction that was ever likely to fall to him." The Amphitheatre Richelieu (named after the French cardinal who founded the French Academy) was packed to the doors with students and Parisians eager to hear le plus intelligent des Anglais, as Wells had been described by Anatole France. In the chair was M. Ferdinand Brunot, Dean of the Faculté des Lettres, eminent professor at the Sorbonne and well known to University students in New Zealand for his textbooks on French literature; with him sat also M. Louis Cazamian, Professor of History of English civilisation at the Sorbonne, (Another of our professors was M. Lanson, whose stupendous history of French literature has been for many years a textbook in .New Zealand University Colleges). It is always interesting to hear how a Frenchman views an Englishman, and

vice versa. M. Brunot, in a speech which was a brilliant example of ‘French tact and courtesy, paid Wells the tribute of independence of thought, and originality of intellect. He described him as un esprit fécondateur. I like that phrase, "quickener of thought."’ But what seemed to appeal most to M. Brunot was the fact that Wells, he said, was never tied down to one fixed formula or pattern of philosophic doctrine ("un esprit jamais asseryi a une formule figée."’) Having been thus introduced to: his audience, Wells rose to speak. He was then, I believe, over 60, though his rubicund complexion made him seem slightly less. His smile was indulgent, kindly, his eyes though small were very alert-the eyes of an imaginative observer of the human comedy. He spoke in English and those who, like myself, expected to hear an orator, may have felt slightly disappointed in the uneven tone and quality of his thin, weak voice, as he began, "This gives me an opportunity of saluting France, custodian of the world’s artistic conscience." One soon forgot the tired voice, to marvel as the brilliance of his thoughts and the beauty of our mother tongue awakened feelings of patriotism and even nostalgia in the heart of at least one New Zealander in the audience. In speaking of the various criticisms which had been showered upon him-

"editor, temperamental schoolmaster, disguised historian"--Wells said that. he preferred to take refuge in the name of "journalist." "Men of letters,’ he said, "live first of all for their own time, and thereafter their value diminishes." Could this strange statement, in part true, be applied to the giants of universal cul-ture-Homer, Michaelangelo, Beethoven, Shakespeare? "Yes," said Mr. Wells, "of these also is this true. We have our time and pass into the night or the museum of aNtiquities.’ Humanity’s impression of the present, whether reflected in art or music, according to this statement of Wells, is, therefore a living mortality, the work of "journalists’’-in the literal sense of the word, with its French root "jour" (day). Referring to Democracy, summarised in the slogan "All human beings are of equal value in the sight of God" or, "One man’s money is as good as another’s," he compared it with Christianity end Islam, which, he said, restrained the individual by exalting all to an equal level. In politics this principle is seen in the electoral system. In literature we see the rise of Democracy in the 16th Century when Cervantes, scoffing at privilege and class distinction, showed the final futility of chivalrous mastery by placing his wisest words in the mouth of a clown (Sancho Panza). The End of Democracy The 20th Century, having seen the culmination of Democracy, was destined also to witness its downfall. "It’s end is near," prophesied Wells. Speaking of the discredit into which the Parliamentary system had fallen throughout the world (the Vote is an instrument of defence, its "utmost power is the peevish dismissal of Governments"), Wells touched upon ‘conditions in Russia, Pekin, and Italy, "The magic of the electoral system is played out’’this prophecy was the most arresting part of his lecture. The world as he depicted it, with its Parliamentary and political life destined to disappear, was faced with the need for re-orientation as regards three problems of vital importance: (1) War, (2) Money, (3) Economic Union. The need for a stable money system of world-wide validity was obviously urgent. "For eight years we have seen the monies of the world dance up and down while bankers and financiers have performed their mysterious operations." (As was to be expected, the speaker was here loudly applauded-the interval between the two world wars was a time of great financial stress in France). With this three-headed sphinx confronting Europe, Wells urged upon his | hearers the need for a deeper interest in international affairs and the new cosmopolitan thought. He expressed a strong dislike for certain elements of fascismhe was anti-communist and anti-fascist. Youth would play an immense part in the future of Europe, and above all in China, where bands of students were taking possession of the Government. "The serious minotity," he concluded, "are the salt of the earth," The subject. chosen by Wells was vast-he dealt with it broadly and vigorously, introducing some astonishing prophecies which betrayed the imaginative insight of the creator of Mr. Britling, and The World of William Clissold. There is probably no English writer of our times who has won, for English literature and thought, higher esteem among the French. }; Beenle than H. Q, Wells.