Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

The Napoleon of Notting Hill
The Napoleon of Notting Hill
The Napoleon of Notting Hill
Ebook261 pages3 hours

The Napoleon of Notting Hill

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

3.5/5

()

Read preview
LanguageEnglish
Release dateJan 1, 1946
The Napoleon of Notting Hill

Read more from G. K. (Gilbert Keith) Chesterton

Related to The Napoleon of Notting Hill

Related ebooks

Related articles

Reviews for The Napoleon of Notting Hill

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars
3.5/5

12 ratings12 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A rather odd, but amusing novel set in a future London (1984, ironically, 80 years after the novel's publication), where democracy has given way to a cynical system whereby a random individual is chosen to be king for a period of time. The story is full of wry observations, reflecting the author's own views, but does get a bit dull and repetitive. Worth a look.
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    1/5
    When I was deeply into the process of becoming a “lapsed Catholic,” two of the priests at the University of Notre Dame (where I was a student) recommended two works by Gilbert Keith Chesterton: Heretics and Orthodoxy. While neither was sufficiently compelling to keep me in the fold, I found both books to be stimulating and illuminating. Moreover, Chesterton had a reputation of being witty and clever if not necessarily profound.Thus I optimistically looked forward to reading the Wordsworth Classics edition of The Napoleon of Notting Hill. Unfortunately, the book itself was quite a disappointment. Part of the problem is that it is quite dated. In addition, it seems to require a detailed understanding of the nuances of different neighborhoods of early 20th century London to understand many of the references, puns, and irony. Finally, the story just isn’t that good. Perhaps old G.K. can be forgiven since this was his first novel. He got better with time, as his Father Brown novels attest. But this one is a hard slog, recommended only for Ph.D. candidates compelled to master his entire oeuvre. (JAB)
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I stayed up much later than I should have to finish this unexpected little book. The plot was quite good, but more compelling than that was Chesterton's distinct style of writing and the little gems he scatters liberally on every page. The Napoleon of Notting Hill is Chesterton's first novel and was published in 1904. In this story, he imagines a London eighty years hence (yes, 1984) in which nothing much has really changed. Horse-drawn hansom cabs still cruise the streets and the government has degenerated into a despotic democracy. A man is chosen from a list (just as one is called for jury duty) to be King. It is not a hereditary title, and the function of this King is to be a sort of national secretary. This systems is described as a despotic democracy because it is an ordinary man just like any other who is chosen off the list, and so he in his one person embodies the spirit of the masses — and yet he rules with an autocrat's power. Auberon Quin is one such young man, who is standing on his head in a public garden to mortify his friends when he receives word that he has been chosen as King. Auberon is a "dangerous man" because all he cares for are jokes. As King, he indulges a fancy of dividing London into respective sections and setting up a full medieval state, complete with flowing robes, contingents of halberdiers, and heraldic insignia for the Provosts of each small city. In the first flush of his joke, Auberon happens to meet a young boy in the vicinity of Pump Street, whom he laughingly admonishes to defend his Pump Street to the death. Ten years later, that young boy is ready to do just that. He is the Provost of Notting Hill, and he opposes a bill that would send a thoroughfare right through Pump Street, the heart of Notting Hill. At first Auberon cannot believe that Wayne is serious, but it soon becomes clear that Wayne is deadly serious. And bloody battle ensues.This book is full of poignant insights, and one of these that struck me was Chesterton's assertion that the smaller a country is, the prouder and more loyal its subjects will be. He says a young boy playing at kingdoms in the street will be all the prouder of his territory if it is so small it barely has room for his feet to stand. This didn't seem to make sense until I thought it through in terms of national identity. The smaller your national state, the more exclusive it is, the more special it makes you feel to belong to such an elite membership. In the end, this story is about the superiority of the small and localized over the large and cosmopolitan. And yet Chesterton is not bigoted; the grocer's store is described lovingly as a place where liquorice from the dark heart of Araby, tea from mystic China, and a whole host of other poetic items are brought to the heart of the local. One thing that my copy's introduction says is problematic for modern readers is Chesterton's alleged glorifcation of violence. As modern readers, we agree with the idea that "small is beautiful," but are not as comfortable with the portrayal of violence as essential to the survival of the small. Chesterton sees things in sharp polarity; the Small must always defend itself against the onrushing tide of the sprawling, monstrous, civilized, monotonous Large. There is another strong polarity in the book, between the Joker and the Fanatic. Auberon embodies the Joker, to whom nothing matters but the humor of things. Adam Wayne typifies the Fanatic, who has no sense of humor and whose loyalty never falters. Wayne takes everythings too seriously; Auberon is incapable of taking anything seriously. I love the end, where the two are finally one.It's hard to believe this is Chesterton's first novel. Of course he had been writing essays for some time, but the work has a very masterful feel. He knows exactly what he is doing, and follows his own rules. I'll leave this with a few choice quotes from the book. The human race, to which so many of my readers belong, has been playing at children's games from the beginning, and will probably do it till the end, which is a nuisance for the few people who grow up....humanity as a whole is changeful, mystical, fickle, delightful. Men are men, but Man is a woman.I want to get my hair cut. I say, do you know a little shop anywhere where they cut your hair properly? I keep on having my hair cut, but it keeps growing again. I have never been to St. John's Wood. I dare not. I should be afraid of the innumerable night of fir trees, afraid to come upon a blood-red cup and the beating of the wings of the Eagle. Who is more certainly the stay of the city, the swift chivalrous chemist or the benignant all-providing grocer?Terribly quiet; that is in two words the spirit of this age, as I have felt it from my cradle. I sometimes wonder how many other people feel the oppression of this union between quietude and terror. I see blank well-ordered streets and men in black moving about inoffensively, sullenly. It goes on day after day, day after day, and nothing happens; but to me it is a dream from which I might wake screaming. There has never been anything in the world absolutely like Notting Hill. There will never be anything else like it to the crack of doom. I cannot believe but that God loved it as He must surely love anything that is itself and unreplaceable. ...the human being sees no real antagonism between laughter and respect, the human being, the common man, whom mere geniuses like you and me can only worship like a god... You have a halberd and I a sword; let us start our wanderings over the world. For we are its two essentials. Highly recommended.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I didn't so much enjoy the story as the way Chesterton put words together. I'll try another book by Chesterton based on that, but can't wholeheartedly recommend this one.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I am ambivalent about Chesterton. He has great ideas and his stories begin with promise but somewhere along the line I lose interest. It is as though he promises insights and delivers the obvious.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This slim volume combines alternative history, satire, and fantasy. Written in 1904, it posits a future 100 years in the future in which there is no international strife. Everything is so stable that, essentially, nothing has changed – everyone goes about their life with no thought of change, progress, or conflict. Government is largely irrelevant, until a new English king is chosen (at random), an eccentric who mandates that each London borough become a city-state, complete with walls, heraldry, and provosts. Ultimately, conflicts arise between the towns, and war ensues. Written before the horrors of World War One, Chesterton appears to idealize the conflicts and carnage. Or is he writing a cautionary tale? One is never sure, and the typically dense Victorian verbiage Chesterton employs mutes the message to modern readers. Occasionally amusing, often tedious, it’s not a book I can recommend except to those who enjoy Victorian prose.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This is his 1st Novel, written in 1904 and I heartily enjoyed it.Set in 1984 in a world where nothing has changed & apathy has set in. A man who believes everything to be a joke is chosen by lottery to become the next king. For his own amusement he turns London into fiefdoms but still nothing changes until one petty ruler takes the idea seriously. I found it humorous and charming but dramatic with the juxtaposition of whimsy and the violence of war. The different ideas are fascinating (the two extremes, political apathy etc...). Plus it’s good for wondering what would happen in a fight in your city.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    The Napoleon of Notting Hill is Chesterton's crack at a futuristic tale, even if he cheats. The 1984 London described in his story is much of the same London of the era of its writing in 1904. There are still horse-drawn hansom cabs and a few of the omnibuses make appearances. Men are wearing frock and nice hats. The main change is that the people have quieted down. England has most of the free world in its power, just having officially absorbed Nicaragua. The political structure is a sort of...I'm not sure. The Kings have their power, but they are not elected nor is the throne hereditary. It is described as a sort of 'jury duty' style selection, and when Auberon Quin is chosen, things go haywire. Quin is a man who fancies himself humourous, refusing (if it is indeed a conscious choice) to see anything in a serious light; the world, he believes, is a massive joke. Inasmuch he rules as he sees fit and upon taking a liking of the antics of a young, would-be soldier weilding a wooden sword one night, divides London into old fashioned kingdoms. There are provosts for ruling beneath him. Each has their own colour scheme, symbol and halberdier troupe. Things run as smoothly as can be for several years until some of the provosts, all randomly elected excusing Quin's friend Barker, come up against a brick wall in their efforts to build some road through several of the areas. Provost Wayne of Notting Hill stands against their efforts, choosing instead the love of his home. This book, as I expected, is an astounding look into a side of humanity that I cannot say I often seek to explore, though I am sure I think on it more than I note. Chesterton shows how, despite what any one person may think at the end of any one day, he or she will very likely end up becoming something that they do not desire or even blatantly dislike. In the world of this book, before Quin stirs things up, the population of London has become complacent. They feel no real attachment or loyalty to their homes, no real 'home-town pride,' and are, in fact, puzzled by the actions of the visiting Nicaraguan president. The man, in the midst of this dull atmosphere, seeks two things. He finds one in a piece of yellow paper he tears from a street sign and the other in his own blood drawn from his hand. They are the colors of his home and his love, even though it is no longer its own country. Such a love is found in the Notting Hill provost as he defends his home against the onslaught of businessmen and politicians. I cannot speak to much further as I do not wish to give up the ending of such a splendid novel, being a firm proponent of Reading Rainbow (but don't take my word for it) ethics. All I know is that, though there was a fabulous ending before the final chapter, Chesterton added his last chapter. It's a very philosophical conversation between two voices that is fascinating, but I am fairly sure that it went over my head. Still, fantabulous. I will leave you now with a quote from the novel itself (Forgive the lack of inclusive language, but Chesterton wasn't writing for the PC crowd, Politically Correct or Personal Computer...): 'For you and me, and for all brave men, my brother,' said Wayne, in his strange chant, 'there is good wine poured in the inn at the end of the world.' 
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Futurists fall into two categories: those who predict the collapse of civilization (Wells, Orwell, Atwood), and those who anticipate sunshine and lollipops (Kurzwiel, The Jetsons). Chesterton invented a new category. In 1904, he wrote a novel about a future eight decades later where everything remained the same. The only thing that increased was apathy.The two main characters in the narrative represented two elements that make the world go 'round: extreme humor and extreme seriousness. Their interplay (especially in the last chapter) is fascinating.This is one of Chesterton's first novels. It's not as polished as The Man Who Was Thursday or even The Club of Queer Trades. It is still well worth reading. There are quotable lines on almost every page that mark this as vintage Chesterton.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    In my opinion, one ofthe greatest fantasy novels ever, and one of GKC's best books, much better than Man Who was Thursday whch many praise. The revolt of local feeling against a universal deadening bureaucracy is wonderfully vivid. It is also both heroic and funny. Adam Wayne is heroic, Auberon Quinn is funny, and together they remake Britain, or at least London, into a gorgeous --yet at times terrifying-- neomedieval culture.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I stayed up much later than I should have to finish this unexpected little book. The plot was quite good, but more compelling than that was Chesterton's distinct style of writing and the little gems he scatters liberally on every page. The Napoleon of Notting Hill is Chesterton's first novel and was published in 1904. In this story, he imagines a London eighty years hence (yes, 1984) in which nothing much has really changed. Horse-drawn hansom cabs still cruise the streets and the government has degenerated into a despotic democracy. A man is chosen from a list (just as one is called for jury duty) to be King. It is not a hereditary title, and the function of this King is to be a sort of national secretary. This systems is described as a despotic democracy because it is an ordinary man just like any other who is chosen off the list, and so he in his one person embodies the spirit of the masses — and yet he rules with an autocrat's power. Auberon Quin is one such young man, who is standing on his head in a public garden to mortify his friends when he receives word that he has been chosen as King. Auberon is a "dangerous man" because all he cares for are jokes. As King, he indulges a fancy of dividing London into respective sections and setting up a full medieval state, complete with flowing robes, contingents of halberdiers, and heraldic insignia for the Provosts of each small city. In the first flush of his joke, Auberon happens to meet a young boy in the vicinity of Pump Street, whom he laughingly admonishes to defend his Pump Street to the death. Ten years later, that young boy is ready to do just that. He is the Provost of Notting Hill, and he opposes a bill that would send a thoroughfare right through Pump Street, the heart of Notting Hill. At first Auberon cannot believe that Wayne is serious, but it soon becomes clear that Wayne is deadly serious. And bloody battle ensues.This book is full of poignant insights, and one of these that struck me was Chesterton's assertion that the smaller a country is, the prouder and more loyal its subjects will be. He says a young boy playing at kingdoms in the street will be all the prouder of his territory if it is so small it barely has room for his feet to stand. This didn't seem to make sense until I thought it through in terms of national identity. The smaller your national state, the more exclusive it is, the more special it makes you feel to belong to such an elite membership. In the end, this story is about the superiority of the small and localized over the large and cosmopolitan. And yet Chesterton is not bigoted; the grocer's store is described lovingly as a place where liquorice from the dark heart of Araby, tea from mystic China, and a whole host of other poetic items are brought to the heart of the local. One thing that my copy's introduction says is problematic for modern readers is Chesterton's alleged glorifcation of violence. As modern readers, we agree with the idea that "small is beautiful," but are not as comfortable with the portrayal of violence as essential to the survival of the small. Chesterton sees things in sharp polarity; the Small must always defend itself against the onrushing tide of the sprawling, monstrous, civilized, monotonous Large. There is another strong polarity in the book, between the Joker and the Fanatic. Auberon embodies the Joker, to whom nothing matters but the humor of things. Adam Wayne typifies the Fanatic, who has no sense of humor and whose loyalty never falters. Wayne takes everythings too seriously; Auberon is incapable of taking anything seriously. I love the end, where the two are finally one.It's hard to believe this is Chesterton's first novel. Of course he had been writing essays for some time, but the work has a very masterful feel. He knows exactly what he is doing, and follows his own rules. I'll leave this with a few choice quotes from the book. The human race, to which so many of my readers belong, has been playing at children's games from the beginning, and will probably do it till the end, which is a nuisance for the few people who grow up....humanity as a whole is changeful, mystical, fickle, delightful. Men are men, but Man is a woman.I want to get my hair cut. I say, do you know a little shop anywhere where they cut your hair properly? I keep on having my hair cut, but it keeps growing again. I have never been to St. John's Wood. I dare not. I should be afraid of the innumerable night of fir trees, afraid to come upon a blood-red cup and the beating of the wings of the Eagle. Who is more certainly the stay of the city, the swift chivalrous chemist or the benignant all-providing grocer?Terribly quiet; that is in two words the spirit of this age, as I have felt it from my cradle. I sometimes wonder how many other people feel the oppression of this union between quietude and terror. I see blank well-ordered streets and men in black moving about inoffensively, sullenly. It goes on day after day, day after day, and nothing happens; but to me it is a dream from which I might wake screaming. There has never been anything in the world absolutely like Notting Hill. There will never be anything else like it to the crack of doom. I cannot believe but that God loved it as He must surely love anything that is itself and unreplaceable. ...the human being sees no real antagonism between laughter and respect, the human being, the common man, whom mere geniuses like you and me can only worship like a god... You have a halberd and I a sword; let us start our wanderings over the world. For we are its two essentials. Highly recommended.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A strange little idea. A lament about the dullness our civilised lives bring on, and a proposition put forth as an alternative. I'm sure there is much the author was trying to say that I do not understand, and some things which I think I understand, he may not have had in mind at all. For instance, I perceive teaching on the value of life because it exists and it is all individual. If you snuff out a life, for instance in the womb, what have you lost? None of us know, because that individual never had a chance to be known. There is a wonderful little paragraph on freedom of speech, what it should mean and what it is not allowed to be for fear of labels.

Book preview

The Napoleon of Notting Hill - G. K. (Gilbert Keith) Chesterton

Project Gutenberg's The Napoleon of Notting Hill, by Gilbert K. Chesterton

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with

almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or

re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included

with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

Title: The Napoleon of Notting Hill

Author: Gilbert K. Chesterton

Illustrator: W. Graham Robertson

Release Date: December 8, 2006 [EBook #20058]

Language: English

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NAPOLEON OF NOTTING HILL ***

Produced by Jason Isbell, Diane Monico, and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net


IN THE DARK ENTRANCE THERE APPEARED A FLAMING FIGURE.


The Napoleon of

Notting Hill


THE NAPOLEON

of

NOTTING HILL

By

GILBERT K. CHESTERTON

With Seven Full-Page Illustrations by

W. GRAHAM ROBERTSON

and a Map of the Seat of War

REV. WILLIAM J. GORMLEY, C. M.

JOHN LANE: THE BODLEY HEAD

LONDON & NEW YORK. MDCCCCIV

Copyright in

U.S.A., 1904

William Clowes & Sons, Limited, London and Beccles.


TO HILAIRE BELLOC

For every tiny town or place

God made the stars especially;

Babies look up with owlish face

And see them tangled in a tree:

You saw a moon from Sussex Downs,

A Sussex moon, untravelled still,

I saw a moon that was the town's,

The largest lamp on Campden Hill.

Yea; Heaven is everywhere at home

The big blue cap that always fits,

And so it is (be calm; they come

To goal at last, my wandering wits),

So is it with the heroic thing;

This shall not end for the world's end,

And though the sullen engines swing,

Be you not much afraid, my friend.

This did not end by Nelson's urn

Where an immortal England sits—

Nor where your tall young men in turn

Drank death like wine at Austerlitz.

And when the pedants bade us mark

What cold mechanic happenings

Must come; our souls said in the dark,

Belike; but there are likelier things.

Likelier across these flats afar

These sulky levels smooth and free

The drums shall crash a waltz of war

And Death shall dance with Liberty;

Likelier the barricades shall blare

Slaughter below and smoke above,

And death and hate and hell declare

That men have found a thing to love.

Far from your sunny uplands set

I saw the dream; the streets I trod

The lit straight streets shot out and met

The starry streets that point to God.

This legend of an epic hour

A child I dreamed, and dream it still,

Under the great grey water-tower

That strikes the stars on Campden Hill.

G. K. C.


CONTENTS


ILLUSTRATIONS


Book I


THE NAPOLEON OF NOTTING HILL


Chapter I—Introductory Remarks on the Art of Prophecy

The human race, to which so many of my readers belong, has been playing at children's games from the beginning, and will probably do it till the end, which is a nuisance for the few people who grow up. And one of the games to which it is most attached is called Keep to-morrow dark, and which is also named (by the rustics in Shropshire, I have no doubt) Cheat the Prophet. The players listen very carefully and respectfully to all that the clever men have to say about what is to happen in the next generation. The players then wait until all the clever men are dead, and bury them nicely. They then go and do something else. That is all. For a race of simple tastes, however, it is great fun.

For human beings, being children, have the childish wilfulness and the childish secrecy. And they never have from the beginning of the world done what the wise men have seen to be inevitable. They stoned the false prophets, it is said; but they could have stoned true prophets with a greater and juster enjoyment. Individually, men may present a more or less rational appearance, eating, sleeping, and scheming. But humanity as a whole is changeful, mystical, fickle, delightful. Men are men, but Man is a woman.

But in the beginning of the twentieth century the game of Cheat the Prophet was made far more difficult than it had ever been before. The reason was, that there were so many prophets and so many prophecies, that it was difficult to elude all their ingenuities. When a man did something free and frantic and entirely his own, a horrible thought struck him afterwards; it might have been predicted. Whenever a duke climbed a lamp-post, when a dean got drunk, he could not be really happy, he could not be certain that he was not fulfilling some prophecy. In the beginning of the twentieth century you could not see the ground for clever men. They were so common that a stupid man was quite exceptional, and when they found him, they followed him in crowds down the street and treasured him up and gave him some high post in the State. And all these clever men were at work giving accounts of what would happen in the next age, all quite clear, all quite keen-sighted and ruthless, and all quite different. And it seemed that the good old game of hoodwinking your ancestors could not really be managed this time, because the ancestors neglected meat and sleep and practical politics, so that they might meditate day and night on what their descendants would be likely to do.

But the way the prophets of the twentieth century went to work was this. They took something or other that was certainly going on in their time, and then said that it would go on more and more until something extraordinary happened. And very often they added that in some odd place that extraordinary thing had happened, and that it showed the signs of the times.

Thus, for instance, there were Mr. H. G. Wells and others, who thought that science would take charge of the future; and just as the motor-car was quicker than the coach, so some lovely thing would be quicker than the motor-car; and so on for ever. And there arose from their ashes Dr. Quilp, who said that a man could be sent on his machine so fast round the world that he could keep up a long, chatty conversation in some old-world village by saying a word of a sentence each time he came round. And it was said that the experiment had been tried on an apoplectic old major, who was sent round the world so fast that there seemed to be (to the inhabitants of some other star) a continuous band round the earth of white whiskers, red complexion and tweeds—a thing like the ring of Saturn.

Then there was the opposite school. There was Mr. Edward Carpenter, who thought we should in a very short time return to Nature, and live simply and slowly as the animals do. And Edward Carpenter was followed by James Pickie, D.D. (of Pocohontas College), who said that men were immensely improved by grazing, or taking their food slowly and continuously, after the manner of cows. And he said that he had, with the most encouraging results, turned city men out on all fours in a field covered with veal cutlets. Then Tolstoy and the Humanitarians said that the world was growing more merciful, and therefore no one would ever desire to kill. And Mr. Mick not only became a vegetarian, but at length declared vegetarianism doomed (shedding, as he called it finely, the green blood of the silent animals), and predicted that men in a better age would live on nothing but salt. And then came the pamphlet from Oregon (where the thing was tried), the pamphlet called Why should Salt suffer? and there was more trouble.

CITY MEN OUT ON ALL FOURS IN A FIELD COVERED WITH VEAL CUTLETS.

And on the other hand, some people were predicting that the lines of kinship would become narrower and sterner. There was Mr. Cecil Rhodes, who thought that the one thing of the future was the British Empire, and that there would be a gulf between those who were of the Empire and those who were not, between the Chinaman in Hong Kong and the Chinaman outside, between the Spaniard on the Rock of Gibraltar and the Spaniard off it, similar to the gulf between man and the lower animals. And in the same way his impetuous friend, Dr. Zoppi (the Paul of Anglo-Saxonism), carried it yet further, and held that, as a result of this view, cannibalism should be held to mean eating a member of the Empire, not eating one of the subject peoples, who should, he said, be killed without needless pain. His horror at the idea of eating a man in British Guiana showed how they misunderstood his stoicism who thought him devoid of feeling. He was, however, in a hard position; as it was said that he had attempted the experiment, and, living in London, had to subsist entirely on Italian organ-grinders. And his end was terrible, for just when he had begun, Sir Paul Swiller read his great paper at the Royal Society, proving that the savages were not only quite right in eating their enemies, but right on moral and hygienic grounds, since it was true that the qualities of the enemy, when eaten, passed into the eater. The notion that the nature of an Italian organ-man was irrevocably growing and burgeoning inside him was almost more than the kindly old professor could bear.

There was Mr. Benjamin Kidd, who said that the growing note of our race would be the care for and knowledge of the future. His idea was developed more powerfully by William Borker, who wrote that passage which every schoolboy knows by heart, about men in future ages weeping by the graves of their descendants, and tourists being shown over the scene of the historic battle which was to take place some centuries afterwards.

And Mr. Stead, too, was prominent, who thought that England would in the twentieth century be united to America; and his young lieutenant, Graham Podge, who included the states of France, Germany, and Russia in the American Union, the State of Russia being abbreviated to Ra.

There was Mr. Sidney Webb, also, who said that the future would see a continuously increasing order and neatness in the life of the people, and his poor friend Fipps, who went mad and ran about the country with an axe, hacking branches off the trees whenever there were not the same number on both sides.

All these clever men were prophesying with every variety of ingenuity what would happen soon, and they all did it in the same way, by taking something they saw going strong, as the saying is, and carrying it as far as ever their imagination could stretch. This, they said, was the true and simple way of anticipating the future. Just as, said Dr. Pellkins, in a fine passage,—just as when we see a pig in a litter larger than the other pigs, we know that by an unalterable law of the Inscrutable it will some day be larger than an elephant,—just as we know, when we see weeds and dandelions growing more and more thickly in a garden, that they must, in spite of all our efforts, grow taller than the chimney-pots and swallow the house from sight, so we know and reverently acknowledge, that when any power in human politics has shown for any period of time any considerable activity, it will go on until it reaches to the sky.

And it did certainly appear that the prophets had put the people (engaged in the old game of Cheat the Prophet) in a quite unprecedented difficulty. It seemed really hard to do anything without fulfilling some of their prophecies.

But there was, nevertheless, in the eyes of labourers in the streets, of peasants in the fields, of sailors and children, and especially women, a strange look that kept the wise men in a perfect fever of doubt. They could not fathom the motionless mirth in their eyes. They still had something up their sleeve; they were still playing the game of Cheat the Prophet.

Then the wise men grew like wild things, and swayed hither and thither, crying, What can it be? What can it be? What will London be like a century hence? Is there anything we have not thought of? Houses upside down—more hygienic, perhaps? Men walking on hands—make feet flexible, don't you know? Moon ... motor-cars ... no heads.... And so they swayed and wondered until they died and were buried nicely.

Then the people went and did what they liked. Let me no longer conceal the painful truth. The people had cheated the prophets of the twentieth century. When the curtain goes up on this story, eighty years after the present date, London is almost exactly like what it is now.


Chapter II—The Man in Green

Very few words are needed to explain why London, a hundred years hence, will be very like it is now, or rather, since I must slip into a prophetic past, why London, when my story opens, was very like it was in those enviable days when I was still alive.

The reason can be stated in one sentence. The people had absolutely lost faith in revolutions. All revolutions are doctrinal—such as the French one, or the one that introduced Christianity. For it stands to common sense that you cannot upset all existing things, customs, and compromises, unless you believe in something outside them, something positive and divine. Now, England, during this century, lost all belief in this. It believed in a thing called Evolution. And it said, All theoretic changes have ended in blood and ennui. If we change, we must change slowly and safely, as the animals do. Nature's revolutions are the only successful ones. There has been no conservative reaction in favour of tails.

And some things did change. Things that were not much thought of dropped out of sight. Things that had not often happened did not happen at all. Thus, for instance, the actual physical force ruling the country, the soldiers and police, grew smaller and smaller, and at last vanished almost to a point. The people combined could have swept the few policemen away in ten minutes: they did not, because they did not believe it would do them the least good. They had lost faith in revolutions.

Democracy was dead; for no one minded the governing class governing. England was now practically a despotism, but not an hereditary one. Some one in the official class was made King. No one cared how: no one cared who. He was merely an universal secretary.

In this manner it happened that everything in London was very quiet. That vague and somewhat depressed reliance upon things happening as they have always happened, which is with all Londoners a mood, had become an assumed condition. There was really no reason for any man doing anything but the thing he had done the day before.

There was therefore no reason whatever why the three young men who had always walked up to their Government office together should not walk up to it together on this particular wintry and cloudy morning. Everything in that age had become mechanical, and Government clerks especially. All those clerks assembled regularly at their posts. Three of those clerks always walked into town together. All the neighbourhood knew them: two of them were tall and one short. And on this particular morning the short clerk was only a few seconds late to join the other two as they passed his gate: he could have overtaken them in three strides; he could have called after them easily. But he did not.

For some reason that will never be understood until all souls are judged (if they are ever judged; the idea was at this time classed with fetish worship) he did not join his two companions, but walked steadily behind them. The day was dull, their dress was dull, everything was dull; but in some odd

Enjoying the preview?
Page 1 of 1