CURRENT LITERATURE
FOOLS AND PHILOS;PHERS : an Anthology. Arranged by J. B. Priestley. (The Bodley Head. 6s. net.) " IF the reader," says Mr. Priestley, in his Introduction to this Anthology, " has even one-tenth of the fun reading it that I had compiling it, all will be well." We think we could' give a very shrewd guess at Mr. Priestley's capacity for merri- ment ; yet we will not gauge our fun by his ; we will only assure him that all is certainly well. We have spent, thanks to him, a delightful evening. Truci the company was a little promiscuous, a little oddly uncontemporaneous ; but then Mr. Priestley was so persuasive a Master of Ceremonies' that all were very soon at their ease. Falstaff hobnobbed with Corporal Trim ; Aguecheek was there, and Foppington, both exquisite knights of deportment ; one corner was loud with the convivialities of Messrs. Sawyer, Swiveller and Jorrocks ; and Prince Seithenyn. ap Seithyn Saidi kept his own inebriate court ; another corner was unctuous with the moralizings of Parson Adams and Mr. Micawber (not to mention Mr. Chadbrand, discoursing on the nature of terewth); country cousins suffered no ignominy there, when their rural quaintnesses were brushed aside by Lady Wishfort and Sir Wilfull Witwoud ; and even lovers were unmindful how they sighed their loves upon the public air. What a hum of witty talk there was ! And like true wits they gave no thought, all the evening, for food ; drink was their only need. Almost the first words that Falstaff said (and he was, of course, the first to come) were, " Give me a cup of sack, boy " : and almost the last words that fell ' from Mrs. Gamp (and she was, of course, the last to go) were, " No, Betsey ! Drink fair, wotever you do." Well, they arc all gone now ; they knew too well to outstay their welcome ; and when we looked round for him, even Mr. Priestley was not there to take our thanks.' In tha quiet of the aftermath, we cannot help it if we scrutinize a little more exactly our departed guests. It is always done. . . . They were, then, some of them, vulgar ? Maybe ; but' their natures were big enough to include that and not offend. They were fools ? Aye, and good philosophers too: They were knaves ? But then what was their knavery but the badge of their superiority, the privilege of their wit —and a shrewd, sorry comment on the gullibility of the rest of us ? Truly fools are very princes among men.
Previous page
