SPECTATOR COMPETITION No. 65

Report by Janus A prize was offered for a (non-scurrilous) analysis of the mental processes which led Janus, to state mendaciously that Charles Wesley died in 1688.

All Spectator competitions provide entertainment ; this one has provided illumination. Janus's mental processes, always an obscure enigma to himself, have been made crystal-clear not by one com- petitor but by dozens. Why did he say that Charles Wesley died in 1688 when he had just ascertained, by reference to the usual sources, that that deplored but inevitable event in fact took place in 1788 ? On certain points there is a marked concurrence of opinion. It was the baneful influence of the Festival of Britain, tending irresistibly to cast the mind back a hundred years. It was a natural association in Janus's subconscious mind with the death of Bunyan, recalled notably by Dr. Vaughan Williams's opera and that, beyond all question, did take place in 1688. Moreover, as two most charitable writers, Michael James and D. I. Beaumanoir Hart, convincingly demonstrate, Charles Wesley belonged in every- thing but fact to the 17th, not the 18th century.

Now all this is very interesting, and to Janus himself very emol- lient. But the award of the prizes is a baffling business. Shall the poets have it—Sally Owen, for example, with her succinct

" Be it not thought a god can lie, Save to promote a deeper truth;. And truth would have been furthered by This son's death in his father's youth." or W. Bernard Wake who, beginning " I lay abed till rather late,

And in that half-unconscious state From which odd, fragments emanate Inconsequent and inchoate. . . ."

carries on the rhyme successfully for 26 lines ; or Guy Innes with his eight ingenious couplets, of which more anon ? Then there are the sequences of which Wilfred Robinson offers four, e.g.: "Charles Wesley—his hymns—' Soldiers of Christ Arise '— Salvation Army—William Booth—booth—fairground—Festival —exhibition—Wembley — Cup final — Blackpool — Blackpool Tower—Bloody Tower—Bloody Assizes—Jeffreys—James II- 1688."

On which it can only be observed that if Janus's mind did work this way it was in the deepest profundities of the subconscious. In spite of the extreme desirability of preventing R. Kennard Davis from figuring in the prize-list every time I feel that his com- bination- of mathematics and psychology is irresistible. But N. Hodgson is unique in indicating means by which similar aberrations on Janus's part can be averted in future. That is so valuable that he must share the first prize. If £4 is expended that way, in two awards of 40s., it will be possible to allot £1 to Guy Innes for his verses (space permits the quotation of only four of his eight couplets). Much desert goes inevitably unrewarded.

FIRST PRIZE (N. HODGSON)

This patient was dropped on his head by his nurse, when a baby, and rolled down a flight of stairs. Although he has for some time now almost completely recovered from the shock to his mental system, his sub- conscious continually endeavours to bring the memory of the incident to the threshold of consciousness, by the recognised method of symbolism. The symbols are obvious enough. Thus, in the Wesley reference 1688 = Revolution = rolling downstairs. But we have here an interest- ing example of that rare phenomenon the double or coincidental symbol. It appears that the nurse was aged 16 years, the baby 8 months, and that there were 8 steps. This explanation is confirmed by the admitted obsession of the patient with bogus universities. Again the interpreta- tion is easy. Bogus universities = devalued degrees = descending steps = downstairs. The cure recommended is to engineer another fall, in order to demonstrate to the subconscious thc comparative unimport- ance of such accidents. Carefully arranged rugs would obviate serious damage.

(R. KENNARD DAVIS) Anyone familiar with the influence of numerical associations upon subconscious cerebral activity will grasp at once why Janus asserted that Charles Wesley died in 1688. Adopting the routine method of assign- ing numerical equivalents to the letters of the alphabet Baking A as 1, etc.), we obtain the following:—

Charles 66 Wesley 89 a 1 Methodist 113 Hymn Writer 153

422

Multiply this figure by 4 ;sanding for d = died) and you get 1688. Multiply its digits, 4 x 2 x 2. Result, 16.

Multiply each of the last two digits by the first. Result, 88. Total result, 1688.

Add together the number of letters in the phrase " Charles Wesley, Methodist Hymn-writer." Result, 32, i.e.. 16 + 8

Now observe the following:— + 8: 1688.

Janus 55 Thou 64 Maker 48 Of 21 A 1 Spectator's 136 Notebook 97

422

With all these coincidences exerting their pressure upon his sub- conscious mind, it would have been surprising if Janus had failed to fall into his error. Psychologically speaking, my dear Watson, the case is elementary.

SECOND PRIZE

(Guy INNFS)

METHODISM IN HIS MADNESS ?

We are not quite as competent as Aaron or as Moses is To analyse the ins-and-outs of Janus' mental processes.

He calls them " aberrations," and he asks us to elucidate The reasons why he was confused about John Wesley's deuced date: As we must be " non-scurrilous" in making our analysis, We won't suggest amnesia, aphasia, or paralysis.

We therefore urge, with diffidence, diplomacy and deference He was too tired to consult the usual bookshelves of reference