15 FEBRUARY 1930, Page 21

England

England.. By Wilhelm Dibelius. Translated by Mary Agnes Hamilton. M.P., with an Introduction by A. D. Lindsay.' (Cape. 15s.) " S44KEBPEARL&N drama is the only other English cOntributiOn that can compare in irnportanee with_ thefree state.' Without these two, civilization as we know it would be unthinkable."-: Such is the conclusion of Professor Wilhelm Dibelius in his book on England, which has now heen published in an English translation. The _German version was published in 1922 ; and has long been known as a most valuable study of English. institutions and ideals. The translation is admirably dOne by Mrs. Hamilton, M.P. The bOOk was written as an ekplanation of England for the use of Germans after the War: but it is valuable to us also beeanse of the keen insight which illumin ates Professor Dibelius's great learning. Every nation must remain something strange and inexplicable to every other ; and, indeed, one's own nation begins to look-strange as soon as one attempts to look at it from the outside. But what is strange may also be attractive. We gain by being able to -see ourselves as others see us, even if we see our own defects somewhat more -clearly in the process. The Germans -have translated Dr. G. P.,Gooch's book on Germany and deriired advantage from it ; the AmericanS learnt much from Lord Bryce, and our own system of government was made more to us by Lewin. Indeed, perhaps in the new age nowbeginning the history of each nation should be written by some scholar from anothei nation. In the paSt we lived too exclusively. upon our own' intellectual and emotional vitals." Brit, however that may be, this book by Professor Dibelius has slouch of genius in it The author is not merely a keen critic and a clear-thinking' PsYchologist : he can balance apparently contradictory elenienta in the English character and produce an excellent portrait of England. There are some small mistakes with regard to facts ; but they are very, unimportant. Indeed, the exactness of description is amazing in an account covering so many different issues- frOm loCal governnient to Seottish Church reform and Univer- sity developments. But it will be more interesting to press the anthor'S arguments to .a fuither conclusion than- merely to praise him.

He is, no doubt,. correct in his view of the result of Oxford and Cambridge education—" a blend of charming amiability in trifles and reserve in most big things, together with self- consciousness, energy, and love of country." - And he sees the great importance of games and of that peculiar person, a " Captain " of a team or of a school. But Professor Dibelius' phrasing suffers from a defect that belongs to all modern lan- guages, for he is continually referring to .the strong " individual- ism" and the individual liberty of Englishmen. On some pages the psychological term " individual" becomes the moral term " egoistical" : and the author like many others, finds himself faced by an insoluble problem—how a nation of egoists can make so strong a society as England undoubtedly. is. Again, if the author will allow one of his " specimens " to laugh at him, why should he say of the Englishman,. " The State he does not understand-" ? Is it not because ." the State " of German political philosophy is " a cold monster," as Nietzsche discovered -?:. It is ridiculous, in view of the skill with which, on 'the author's own showing, the English have produced the " free state,'?. to say that they do not understand `, the State."

It is much more likely that the State which the English have created is a new thing, .unintelligible outside their tradi_ tion : for it is based -upon that very group-spirit which every foreigner notices in our games and their " Captains," who are " absolute," without being despots. The peculiarity of the Anglo-Saxon world seems to be its "assoeiationism," not its " individualism." Of course, we object to being regi- mented—because we can stand in a queue by ourselves We have so great an ability for " sticking together " that we object to anyone offering us' patent " sticking plaster," called laws and administration. The relation of Australia and. Canada to. Great Britain remains inexplicable, on the assump tion that we are materialistic indiVidualists. The relation of the villager to the squire is mere snobbery, except on the cricket-field, where its true characteristics appear. This is implied but not accepted in the argument of Professor Dibelius.- Even our peculiar forms of religion; as he sees, are quite unlike: German piety, because orris are dominated by communal Worship. Every sect becomes with us a club. And clubs

are the outposts of Empire, wherever the English go. • This same ability for association is, perhaps, the ground for our peculiar methods of reform. We are somewhat slow to' move ; but when we move, we move together. And the' English 'extension of political liberties has been a gradual process because the privileged have been induced to move,' without violent disruption of society by the unprivileged.' This is not altogether good. The affection for what Henry James 'called" the tone of time " has led us to preserve, in some cases, what ought to have been destroyed—like pictur- esque and insanitary cottages. But on the whole, it is good that the new age should be rooted in the old. The result is a Commonwealth of great extent and variety, which Professor Dibelius is inclined to put down to a " love of power," although he corrects himself by saying, almost in the same breath, that it is " a sense of supremacy " which is peculiar to the English.

The love of power is not peculiar to the English : but the sense of superiority—social, not intellectual—is only too common among us ; and it creates one of the problems of imperial government. The English club, which is very good for the English, may be an instrument of isolation in an alien land. The ability to associate with his fellow-Englishmen does not include an ability for understanding other races, or even desiring to understand them. This peculiarity Professor Dibelius does not emphasize : nor does he give sufficient recognition to the English " sense of humour." Even the " superior " Englishman can survive being laughed at, whereas neither an Italian, nor a Prussian, nor a Frenchman could. The cheery fellowship of British soldiers was unintelligible-to nations less traditionally " merry." But even this ability to laugh at one's self does not seem to correct the defects of that English aloofness which annoys foreign peoples. A sense of superiority is often combined with shyness or awkwardness. It is usual to consider nations by contrasting them. The most interesting points in the contrasts drawn by Professor Dibelius are that the Americans are English minus the aristo- cratic tradition, and that the Germans, as compared with the English, are intellectualists. Perhaps it is impossible for anyone who belongs to the English tradition to regard the English attitude towards intellectual pursuits as a defect. It is true that the Professor in an English University is a benevolent " patron " rather than a pivot of learning : but is that bad ? In any ease, it will be regarded in England as a compliment to Professor Dibelius to say that his book is full of that sound common sense which is the best psychology.

C. DELISLE BURNS