RECREATION-AND-WATER.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR. "1
Sru,—In your notice of Mr. Baldwin Brown, of whose Christian character and great gifts you speak with so much appreciation, you specially point out for admiration his warning " against that sickly tendency to dilute amusement till it becomes recrea- tion-and-water,'" which, you say, "is so common in families which have inherited the Puritan traditions."
Now whether or not Mr. Baldwin Brown himself would have chosen that remark to be illustrative of a salient point of his teaching, I venture to think that it is one open to misconstruc- tion. Very possibly I have failed to derive from it the impres- sion intended by either himself or his exponent, for it certainly seems to me that the danger into which people generally are likely to fall is much rather that of allowing their own or their -children's amusement to be carried too far—beyond the line, that is, which an educated.conscience should approve—than to stop too much short of it.
The evil of allowing amusement to be sought in questionable ways, and of bringing children up to regard " sport " as the serious business of life (as is the rule in the "fashionable world"), is so very dire an evil that it seems hard hues that its chief opposers—the " inheritors of Puritan traditions"- -should receive a slap for their efforts to inculcate in their children the principle that 'amusement, even for the young, should always be subservient to duty ; in other words, that the question, " Is it right ?" is more important than that of, 4' Wouldn't it be jolly ?" Doubtless, such considerations are a gene' ne to human nature, and are usually cast aside with contempt in the impulsive pursuit of pleasure. But Sir, I ask you, as a Christian, to reflect with me over this question,—Is it possible to combine the natural abandon of unrestrained delight in the pleasures of the world as it is, with discipleship of Christ the Crucified P Christianity, being at present remedial, can hardly 'fail to be in antagonism with much that might otherwise be heartily pursued.
For instance, parents entering with fullest sympathy into their children's pleasures, and wishing to give them all legiti- mate amusement, may yet feel unable to take them to a panto- mime, because they know enough about the disastrous moral and physical results of such performances on the unfortunate children acting in them, to make it impossible for them to sit and laugh at such a ghastly show, nor amuse their own children at the expense of other people's. Indeed, for somewhat similar reasons, they may be obliged to deny them any theatrical amusement at all ; for though the evil is less flagrant when actors and actresses are of an age to deliberately choose their profession, and more or less know what they are about in lead- ing the lives of temptation they do, yet still, so long as the pro- fession is one which these parents would distinctly object to on moral grounds for their children, they cannot conscientiously give their encouragement to the drama. So, again, although they may heartily approve of dancing in moderation, they can- not afford to fritter away their own or their children's lives in the frivolities of a London season. So, finding it impossible to .refuse some invitations without refusing all, they may have been forced to put balls in the category of forbidden things ; and whether in so doing they are mistaken or otherwise, I am sure you must admit that they are placed in a dilemma difficult enough to give them some claim not only to be fairly judged, but to be recognised by their fellow-Christians as nobly making a stand against evil and for right. I wiil not trouble you with any justification of their conduct in keeping those for whose training they are responsible from contact with such moral abominations as those of the raceconree, &c.; for indeed, the whole question may be summed-up in the consideration of whether it is worth while—whether it is not a feeble thing for which those who know better ought to be ashamed—to do what may be wrong for purely and simply our own or our children's
entertainment. •
As to the "stopping short when the real power of recreation begins," it may be so sometimes ; but all the same, I wish you and Mr. Baldwin Brown could have •known some of the young people brought up in " strict families " with whom I am ac- quainted, and could have judged for yourselves whether in their more simple amusements all stimulating and invigorating power is lost !" Surely a range of enjoyment still remains when every questionable amusement has been put aside, quite large enough to give plenty of healthy recreation to the young. And is not recreation likely to be more truly worthy of the name if it is not made the chief object of life, and when it has not become the weary toil that unrestricted amusement is apt to degenerate into P
What " diluted " amusement is I do not, indeed, pretend to know, and cannot even guess at the nature of the " water " added in families, however strict, to (let us say) a game of lawn- tennis or a mountain scramble. But even if amusements which no sane present-day Puritan could forbid to his children do not allow " full-play " to all the faculties, which is no doubt the case,—is it, I repeat, not worth while that some self-denial should be practised, even by the young and high-spirited, in the cause of what they (or even only their parents) believe to be that of Righteousness P—I am, Sir, &c., C. S.
[Our correspondent has been fortunate, if she has had no ex- perience of recreation-and-water. We should call the " Gallery of Illustration," as distinguished from any well-conducted theatre, recreation-and-water ; we should call the various games in which the object was to beguile children into learning geography, or arithmetic, or history, by way of amusement, recreation-and-water. In other words, they cause no hearty relaxation of the mind, no hearty relief after hearty work.— ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
