Lcavis accuses Sir Charles Snow of ignor- ance of history.
But his own is so abysmal that it would require a new Dunciad to do justice either to his folly or to his arrogance. True, owing to all lack of ability on Leavis's part to write English with clarity, let alone grace, it is difficult to be sure of exactly what enormities he is attributing to Snow. However, he does quote with obvious distaste this sentence, condemning it as a mere brute assertion, callous in its irresponsibility:
For with singular unanimity, in any country where they had the chance the poor have walked off the land as fast as the factories could take them.
Now, as an historian, I must stress that this is no brute assertion, but is a simple historical fact, as Leavis himself would know were he not so 'blankly ignorant' of research done over the last thirty years on the Industrial Revolution either in this country or elsewhere. Facts presumably have little interest for Leavis and no one could accuse him of having a scholarly mind. Even more serious, however, is Leavis's complete misunderstanding of the nature of the historical process: Who [he asks rhetorically] will assert that the average member of a modern society is more fully human, or more alive, than a Bushman, an Indian peasant or a member of one of those poignantly surviving primitive peoples, with their marvellous art, skills and vital intelligence?
And the answer is most historians, most anthropolo- gists, most psychologists, most economists, indeed any human being who does not believe that there is a hidden virtue in ignorance, superstition, dirt, poverty, disease and early death. Has Dr. Leavis ever seen an Indian peasant, a Bushman, or a primi- tive people exercising their vital intelligence? If he has, then he must be devoid of pity and utterly blind to the human condition to think their lives are in any way superior to that of the average member of a modern society. If, as I suspect, he has not, it under- lines the poverty of his critical faculties and the depth of his ignorance. His ignorance, however— sheer blind ignorance—is what emerges most clearly from his senseless diatribe on Snow.
Previous page
