You are on page 1of 8

Letter from MILAN

The End of Ideology?

F Rabout
o Mthe xath to the ~7th of September
one hundred and fifty writers,
was, was exceptionally spirited and to the
point. Rather, each speaker commentedon
politicians, journalists, university teachers someaspect or issue in one of the several
met in the austerely elegant MuseoNazionale papers whichhad been laid before the con-
della Tecnicae della Scienza to expoundto ferenceat that particular session, andthen the
each other their ideas about "The Future of author of each paper at the endof the session
Freedom." commented on the points made by the
The conference, which was convoked by speakers about his papers. Only whenthe
the Congress for Cultural Freedom, was chairman was far-sighted enough to group
painstakingly prepared with clear intention. the commentatorsabout a few basic themes
It was not the purposeof the organisers to did the procession of speakers become a
end with definite conclusions, with agreed parade rather than a promenade. This
statements or with public pronou~.cements. happened, for example, when Mr. Minoo
It was rather to forward the process of Masani, the clear-witted author-diplomat-
breaking the encrustations of liberal and politician-businessman from Bombay,pre-
socialist thought, to discover their common sided over the session devoted to the
ground, and to push forward with the task similarities and differences of "Communist"
of formulating more realistic and more and "capitalist" economicsystems; he had,
inclusive ideas on the conditions of the free it was true, the advantage of having under
society. his chairmanship two extremely lucid and
There were, nevertheless, material hin- polemical papers each devotedto exactly the
drances imposed by the ground plan of the same theme--Soviet economic growth--and
long, relatively narrow,meetinghall, and by taking diametrically opposedpositions. Nor-
the lowness of the rostrum from which mally, however,this wasnot the case; there
speakers addressed the audience; and a were several sessions in which there were
general deficiency of the conference lay in four to six papers all very stimulating and
the fact that there was so muchso well and on a very high intellectual level, each
so challengingly said on so many:opics re- different from the others but no one more
. lated to the central themesthat heads were challenging than the others. Thenthe range
sent into a whirl. Appetitesfor further dis- of attention spread and the analysis was not
cussion were continually being amused--first cumulative.
by an avalanche of papers and then by a For this reasonit wouldbe very difficult to
steady stream of speakers whowere allowed summarisethe results of the conference. It
somefive minutesin whichto set forth their was like a conversation amonga group of
best ideas--and they could not be satisfied lively, well-informed,and disciplined minds
except on the occasion whenit was possible which goes on for hours and hours and
to meetat lunch or dinner, by whichtime the touches on long series of fascinating and
scent of the idea had been somewhatdissi- tricky problems,refreshes themall, settles
pated. In the sessions themselvesthere was none, a:ad passes from one to the other with-
little such interchange--though what there out either an explicit consolidation of the
5).

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
The End of Ideology? 53
incipient consensusor a promulgationof the pendenceof thought and an original feeling
outstanding differences of opinion. Then, for the reality of sociallife.
whenthe conversation breaks up, one leaves Thepapers, despite their diversity of view-
with one’s headbuzzingwith ideas, with the point andsubject matter, circled over a single
feeling that this idea oughtto be re-thought theme. Almost every paper was in one way
and that that problem ought to be recon- or another a critique of doctrinairism, of
sidered, and at the sametime cannot restate fanaticism, of ideological possession. Almost
exactly whatwassaid, exactly what newidea every paper at least expressed the author’s
or bit of knowledge was added to one’s idea of mankindcultivating and improving
understanding. Such conversations, without its owngarden, secure against obsessional
adding a single proposition to our existing visions and phantasies, and free from the
stock of knowledge,heighten our sensitivi- harassmentof ideologists and zealots. It was
ties, direct our attention, openour mindsand the intention of the conference’sorganisersto
trouble them. This was the wayin whichthe movethought further around the turning-
Milan Conference worked. point to which we have come in the last
years. This turning point mightbe described
T rtference
E papers prepared for the MilanCon-
numberedmore than fifty and
as the end of ideological enthusiasm.

practically nonewas pedestrian, fatuous, or


excessivelyclichdd; at least four-fifths con- I to state thethetheme
N O N E Of preliminarypapers written
of the conference,Pro-
tained novel ideas or fresh formulations. fessor RaymondAron pointed out that the
Someof the papers, e.g.M. Bertrand de underpinningsof the great ideological con-
Jouvenel’s "SomeFundamentalSimilarities flicts of the first part of this century had
betweenthe Soviet and Capitalistic Economic largely been p_ulled out. The once unequi-
Systems,"wereof striking originality; others vocal distinction between"right" and "left"
though less original were written with such had been damagedby the knowledge that
lucidity andincisivenessthat it wasa pleasure combinationsonce alleged by extremist doc-
to read them and to hear their authors trines to be impossible--combinationslike
summarisetheir main points---here I may collective ownershipand tyranny, progressive
mention Mr. lohn Plamenatz’s "Threats social policies and full employmentunder
to a Free Society," Professor Ely Devon’s capitalisation, large-scale governmentalcon-
"Changing Economic Ideologies in the trols with public liberties--are actually pos-
United Kingdom,"M. KamalJumblat’s "Re- sible. Thefull awarenessthat nationalisation
flections on Nationalismand Free Societies," is no universal solution to economicproblems
Michael Freund’s "Tradition and Freedom"; and that British socialism has not resulted
others impressed by their sombreclarity, in tyranny have materially weakenedthe
particularly Professor GermanArciniegas’s ideologies of thorough-goingsocialism and.
"South America: Freedomvs. Totalitarian- thorough-goingneo-liberalism.
ism" and Professor TakeyasuKimura’s "The Theobscuringof the onceclear distinction
Economic Foundations of Freedom: Some between "left" and "right," the discovery
Observations in the Light of Japanese Ex- that over the past thirty years the extremesof
perience";still other papers, like Mr.R. H.S. "right" and "left" had disclosed identities
Crossman’s"DemocraticControl of Foreign which were much more impressive than
Policy," althoughnot original, stimulatedby their differences, the disasters of governing
the lively and bellicose tones in whichthey societies by passionateadherenceto formula~,
were written and presented; and there were the crimes committedin the namesof sacred
still others, like Miss HannahArendt’s "The principles of policy in Nazi Germanyand
Rise and Developmentof Totalitarianism the Soviet Union, had all left a residue of
and Authoritarian Formsof Governmentin scepticism amongmanyintellectuals in most
the 2oth Century," which intrigued by a countries, and created uneasiness among
fascinating obscurity and the rumbleof pro- others whoare not yet sceptical regarding
fundity; finally I should mentionthe repre- their inherited doctrines. Thefact, too, that
sentatives of Americansociological wisdom, in our decade the nations whichhave most
sometimes turgid and seldom elegant, but successfully managed their internal affairs--
bringing to the conferencean insistent inde- Great Britain, the United States, Western

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
54 Edward Shils
Germany, and the Scandinavian countries-- market economy in making decisions as to
have increasingly considered their major the tyFes and quantities of goods to be pro-
domestic policies without regard for the stan- duced, the allocation of resources, etc.? The
dard distinctions of "left" and "right," of problera was unfortunately not addressed by
socialism and laissez-faire, but in a matter-of- the speakers ~n this session. Mr. Peter Wiles
fact way which recognised no ger~eral prin- anc~ Mr. Colin Clark (who was very regret-
ciples and treated each emerging situation on tabby a~sent from the conference) treated the
its ownmerits, has contributed to disillusion question of the rate of development of the
intellectuals of these countries of the notion Soviet economy in their papers. Professor
that one side or the other had a monopolyof Libero Lenti’s more academic and.theoretical
the care of freedom and welfare. paper was passed over in the discussion, and
This was the background of reflection in so, on the surface, the conference seemedto
which the conference had its origin. The veer away from its task of discovering what
agenda was prepared accordingly. The first solid ground was still left under the claims of
session dealt with the growing hollowness of our inherited ideologies. Instead, the passions
the conventional distinctions between social- of the cold war were raised by some partici-
ism and capitalism. The position had already pants whothought that Mr. Wiles’s interpre-
been taken in an authoritative manner by tation gave too favourable a picture of the
Mr. HughGaitskell, who held to his realist achievements of the Soviet economy. Yet
and moderate equalitarian Socialism while here, too, the pressure of the programme
renouncing every clich& Three papers by was effective. Although there was no agree-
Professor J. K. Galbraith of Harvard Uni- ment between Mr. Wiles and the disputants,
versity, Professor Devons of Manchester manyof whomwere horrified by Mr. Wiles’s
University, and Dr. Walter Tritsch o~ Ascona mischievous manner of presenting the Soviet
dealt with the vanity of the claims of simon- achievements, it definitely served to prevent
pure socialists and free-enterprise liberals. any complacencyfrom settling over the con-
Professor Devons’s paper was devoted to ference.
showing in detail for Great Britain, while
Galbraith’s and Tritsch’s papers were occu-
pied with the general argument, that it was O ximpression
~ could not avoid being struck by the
that the conferees were not
futile to continue to argue along the old lines on the defensive. As against Mr. Stuart
as if the crucial distinction in economicpolicy Hampshire’s feeling of repugnance for the
was between socialism and capitalism. What idea o£ safeguarding or defending freedom
was striking in these three papers was the which he thought characterised the con-
deliberate eclecticism of the authors in their ference, it seemedto me that the conference
attitude towards the solution of economic had in part the atmosphere of a post-victory
problems. Intellectuals were chastised for ball. There was a very widespread feeling
their rigidity, unwillingness to compromise, that there was no longer any need to justify
and especially for their fear of being impure. ourselves e, is-k-vis the Communistcritique of
Fromthis preliminary sally against doctri- our society. The calls for a renewal of faith
nairism in economic policy, and its emphasis or a system of beliefs which we could offer in
on the need to confront problems rather than competition with Bolshevism were very few
to conformwith the tenets of a general faith, and were either rejected or disregarded.
the programme went forward to distinguish There was, in a variety of ways, a sometimes
the real differences between the Soviet and rampant, sometimes quiet conviction that
the Western types of economy. It was the Communism had lost the battle of ideas with
desire of the organisers of the conference to the West. Even the "thaw" about which
examine the extent to which the Soviet eco- there was disagreement was taken in stride,
nomic system, simply by virtue of being a whatever the interpretation, as a vindication
large-scale industrial system, was forced to of the anti-ideological attitude. Mr. Wiles’s
meet the same conditions and to face the paper performed the great service of putting
same problems as the capitalist economies of a block in the way of complacency, and even
the West. In other words, was central plan- those who were not convinced by him must
ning a myth, did the Soviet economic system surely have assimilated some restraints on a
have to confront the same problems as a tendency to write the Communistsoff as not

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
The End of Ideology? 55
only morallyand intellectually in the wrong, need for economicand political independence
but as weaktoo.* in the underdeveloped areas, Mr. Wiles’s
Whatever complacencythere might have reference in his paper, and the provision of
been among the Western anti-Communist two full sessions wereall evidenceenoughof
participants wasblownsky high in the third this desire to reach out towardsa moreuni-
session. This session, devoted to economic versal concernfor liberty a~d not to rest con-
progress in the underdeveloped countries and tent with a European-American view of the
the rivalry of Communistand democratic matter. Yet the bounds of provision were
methods,presented a large numberof papers. broken as soon as the discussion started.
Mr. Eric da Costa’s paper was remarkable Speakerafter speaker went to the platform,
for the fluent optimismwith whichhe looked Africans, Asians, Middle Easterners: some
on the economicfuture in India. Professor speaking with statesmanlike judiciousness,.
Arthur Lewiswasoptimistic too, but he was others with sardonic defiance, somein sober
more insistent on the need for strong academic language, others like forthright
measureswhichhe thought fully compatible sages. They asked for aid from the more
with political liberty andrepresentativeinsti- advancedcountries, stressed howprecarious
tutions in the newlysovereignstates of Asia was the situation of liberty amongthem, and
and Africa. M.de Jouvenel’s.paper, a really expressed their belief that without an im-
remarkable piece of ingenious research, pressive rate of economicprogress, liberty
seemedto try to showthat there wasno short might collapse. There were groundsfor dis-
cut for the economically underdeveloped agreementhere. The Westernershad in their
countries. Theywouldhave to go through an earlier statements disavowedany sympathy
industrial revolution which,for the severity for the idea that liberty rests on an economic
of life it inflicted onthe peopleas consumers, basis. Not only were they anti-Marxist but
wouldnot be less painful than the industrial they wereopposedto the sameline of thought
revolution in the Westor the developmentof whenit emanatedfrom the extremeliberals,
Soviet industry. His paper, whichestablished whoinsisted that political liberty depended
striking parallels between the pattern of on a flee market economy.Perhaps because
Soviet and capitalist economicdevelopment they were put off by the economismof the
and which belonged more properly in the Africans and Asians, perhaps becauseit was
precedingsession, disclosed one of the sub- thought to be more courteous to those from
sidiary intentions of the Congress:namely, outside the Westto allow themto speakfirst,
the persuasionof the intellectual leaders of perhaps becausethe delegates were worn out
the free societies with underdeveloped econo- by the strenuousand lively discussion of the
miesthat they should not think that, by re- morning session, the Western membersof
nouncingthe amplepolitical liberties which the conference did not speak until Mr. Max
they nowenjoy, they will be able to make Beloff of Oxfordwent to the platform. With
morerapid and better economicprogress. angry eloquence, he denied the obligation of
A storm burst. It would be wrongto say the richer countries to provide economicaid
that the organisers of the conference had to the poorercountries, in a voice whichex-
overlooked the problem of freedomand wel- pressedresentmentagainst the resentful over-
fare in those countries of Africa and Asia tones whichwere noticeable in the remarks
whichhad only recently acquiredsovereignty. of some of the Asians. This was followed
The mere fact of the presence of so many shortly by another vigorous criticism of the
distinguished participants from those two intellectuals of underdeveloped countries for
continents, the generous references in Mr. their excessive demandswhich generated
Gaitskell’s talk on the opening day to the hopes whichcould not be realised.
A genuine tension was generated by this
session which weighed on manyminds with
* This assumption shouldnot be attributed to
the organisers.ProfessorPolanyi’sinsistenceon disturbance and benefit throughoutthe con-
his belief that the Soviet economyhad been ference. It cameout even more strongly in
forcedto becomea surreptitious marketeconomy Thursdaymorning’ssession on Nationalism,
could be interpreted as an admissionthat some under the heading of the "Threats and Ob-
of Mr.Wiles’scontentionsregardingthe magni- stacles to a Free Society." Here again the
tude o~: Soviet economicgrowthwerecorrect. distance between the African and Asian

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
56 Edward Shils
memberson the one side and the ]~u:opeans the put;lic; Mr. Denis Healey, Mr. Max
and Americanson the other becametangible. Beloff, ar.d Mr. Stuart Hampshirewere less
For the Westerners, nationalism was an un- sanguine about the capacity of the massesto
fortunate distraction, at worst a source of understand the complexproblemsof foreign
great troubles springing from the passions, policy, but they did not at the same time
at best a worthyactor in the ~gtt-L century speak ill of the ordinary man. He was not
drama whichwas nowover. For the Asiatics criticised for irrationality, savagery,etc. In
and Africansit wasas integral a part of the short, the working and the lower middle
conceptof freedomas liberty of the press or classes haveceasedto be the objects of ideo-
of personal movement.This session under- logical passions. Thethesis of WalterLipp-
scored the danger of Westerncomplacencyat man from which Mr. Crossman took his
havingweatheredthe storm of ideologies. point of departure, namely a belief in a
higher law, found no support, either. The
F.X~Rthe effort to showthe baselessness fact that the whole morning’s discussion,
A of ideological pretensions, andthe dis- which was one of the most energetic, drew
coveryof the persistenceof nationalist senti- on none of the older lines of argumentabout
mentas a part of the love of liberty outside the effectiveness of democracymight be re-
the Western world, the conference went on gardedas evidence that the British scholars
to examinethe impactof extremist ideologies whoheld the floor most of the time know
on the workingof democratic institutions. Iittle or nothing of Michels, Wallas, Ostro-
The paper by Professor SeymourLipset of gorski, Weber, Tocqueville, or that the
ColumbiaUniversity, which touched in an emancipation from ideology has gone so
imaginative wayon the dangers to political far that the inherited objects of enthusiasm
democracy of lower-class fundamentalism in the debate about the inner stability of
and authoritarianism, and whichraised the democracyhave lost their meaning to the
question of "McCarthyism" without the best mindsin the contemporaryintellectual
usual stereotypes, aroused not a word of classes.
comment.It is not easy to explain whythe This viewof the situation is reinforced by
complexof irrationalities whichhad so exer- the meetingin the afternoon of the sameday
cised Europeanand Americanintellectuals whenthe influence of the mass media and
until very recently should have been dis- the rise of totalitarianism were discussed
regarded in this conference. Of the discus- under the amiablechairmanshipof Professor
sants only Mr. George Kennanreferred to Galbraith. The views of Ortega y Gasser,
the loyalty-security excitement in American Lcderer,andall the quasi-aristocratic critics
society whenreplying at a later session to of the culture of the massesand of the danger
Mr. Daniel Bell’s gratified contemplationof whichthey wereallegedto offer to free insti-
Americanlife. Likewise there was little tutions, in consequenceof apathy, ignorance,
anxiety about Communist infiltration. There vu.lgarity, bestiality, frivolousness, might
was not a word of commenton Professor have expected a favourable hearing here. On
Arthur Schlesinger, Jun.’s paper on "Free- the contrary, the masseswere exculpated by
dom and Subversion." Have the Commu- Mr. Bell and their highbrowcritics rebuffed.
nists cometo appear so preposterous to our In a brilliant paper in the following day’s
Westernintellectuals that it is no longercon- session on "The Resilience of Liberty," Mr.
ceivable that they could be effectively sub- Man~sSperber accepted with only a little
versive? Is it nowthought that there is no regret the unideologicalcharacter of the ordi-
longer any danger of the workingclasses in nr_rv man’soutlook, eventhoughhe wasfully
the advancedWestern countries falling for awarethat indifference towardspublic events
their propaganda? recluced_the effectivenessof democraticinsti-
On the other hand, Mr. Crossman’sbash- tutions, and provides no bulwarkagainst the
ing offensive to vindicate the goodjudgment emergence of tyranny--although once a
of the massesin questions of foreign policy tyrann~exists it providesa limit to the ex-
found little support and muchdissent. This p~nsivepowersof the tyrannical authority.
paper, which dominated the discussion, Only Mr. Czeslaw Milosz in his charming
called forth no echoesof the older criticisms paper on "Belinsky and the Unicorn" was
of democracybased on the incompetenceof unsparingin his ideologist’s criticism of the

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
The End of Ideology? 57
refusal of the ordinary manto live on the transcended. Theavoidanceof the temptation
heroic heights of historical grandeur. to build a newideologyis a negative achieve-
The fact that in this great assembly of ment,too.
intellectuals only Messrs. Kennanand Milosz The positive standards of action inherent
took shots at the private life andtrivial cul- in our present attachment to moderationin
ture of the ordinary citizen showedhowfar action and orderliness and stability in change
we have movedfrom the ideology-ridden haveto be moreclearly discerned. To get rid
period whenthe simple philistine was ex- ’of heroismas a universal rule of action and
horted to renouncehis drab routine for life to replace it by unqualified and unmeasured
on the peaks, or whenhe was denouncedfor philistinism will not do. Toget rid of rebel-
failing to do so and whenthe working man liousness and antinomianismand to replace
hada heroic ideologyattributed to him. it by an uncritical acceptance of tradition
The narrowingof the gap whichseparates will not do. To get rid of the tyranny of the
most of the friends of freedomwas apparent highbrowand to replace it by popular vul-
also on the session on Saturday, whenPro- garity will not do. If we undoevery one of
fessor Sidney Hook, steeped in Deweyian our older errors by runningas far as wecan
instrumentalism, took the lead in conceding in the opposite direction, weshall only re-
the importanceof a traditional frameworkof habilitate the needfor ideology;it will creep
thought and sentiment for the maintenance in through the back door, or moreparticu-
of liberal democraticinstitutions. larly, through a rebellious youngergenera-
tion. Thebelief that our traditional ideals
T H ~. Milan Conference showed us how have nowbeen exhausted because of their
muchwestill have to do. For decades completefulfilment must be avoidedas much
the proponentsof freedomhave been strugg- as the convictionthat our virtue consists in
ling against National Socialism, Fascism, our rejection of whatever exists. Wemust
and Bolshevism,on the battlefield, in the rediscover the permanentlyvalid element in
legislative chamber, and in the study. Now our historical ideals--elements whichmust
in America, Great Britain, Germany,and be recurrently realised without ever being
the Scandinaviancountries, and to a lesser definitivelyrealisable, onceandfor all.
extent in Italy and France, as well as in the In our rejection of the ideologies wemust
international arena, wehave achieved some study what can be salvaged from them, and
success. The work of subversion has been what in them should be kept alive, how
confined in Europe and America, or de- and in what measure grandiose visions and
molished. There is a standstill of an enig- austere standards have their place. Every
matic sort in the relations of the Westand society needsa certain amountof these ideals
the Soviet Union, and Marxism, like just as it would be ruined by too muchof
National Socialism and Fascism before it, them.
has lost its appealto the intellectuals. Weno There is another task whichMilanhas im-
longer feel the need for a comprehensive posed with great force. Wemust no longer
explicit system of beliefs. Wehaveseen not think only for Europeanor Americansociety.
only the substantiveerrors of totalitarianism Ourtheories of liberty, of the relation be-
and extremist enthusiasm, but wehave also tween religion and progress, tradition and
seen the wrongfulnessof the type of ideologi- intellectual independence, must be thought
cal orientation whichonce constituted its out and formulated in such a waythat they
attraction. will do justice to the situations of the new
There is, however, more to life, and countries of Asia and Africa and South
especiallyintellectual life, than the detection America.
andrefutation of error. Thereare great tasks It is too early to say yet just howto go
to be undertaken amidst the ruins of the about these tasks of helping the growthof a
ideologies. Wemust reconstruct our beliefs fruitful liberty in the Asiatic and African
without yielding to the temptation--which and South Americancountries. A few things
can never die out completelyamongintellec- are, however, very clear: having recently
tuals-to construct newideologies, as rigid, freed ourselves from ideological radicalism,
as eager for consistencyandfor universal ob- wemust not be affronted to see it amongour
servance as those which have been now Asiatic and African friends wholearned it

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
58 Edward Shils
in our ownuniversities in the West; still our- Westerners. In the final session of the con-
selves penetrated by strong national identifi- ference, he sought, with his customary
cations, we must not be repelled by the grace, to acknowledge this new sense of
greater national sensitivities of the members the necessity of thinking of the problems of
of nations which have only recently become liberty in a more universal perspective. He
states. Condescension, resentment against re- said:
sentment, the insistence on gratitude will
"The project of this conference was first
avail us nothing. It will only narrow our own mooted about two years ago and I can still
minds, render our ownthought less fruitful clearly rememberwhat we then hoped it would
than it might be, and obstruct the growth of achieve .... I confess that after this meetingI
freedom in those countries. Even if Milan can hardly recognise myself as the person who
had not stirred our thoughts into the direc- entertained these prospects. For I took it for
tion in which they should go in the better granted at the time that the decisive problems
understanding and reinforcement of our own of our age were those raised in Europe by
liberties, it wouldhave justified itself by its Eu.ropeans. That we had only to resist vic-
reminder, not always very pleasant, of the toriously and finally to overcomethe explosive
forces of Moscow’sLeninism, to regain the
problems of maintaining and developing free peaceful leadership of the world which had
societies outside the West. Mr. A. D. ternporarily slipped from our hands.
Gorwala,a great Indian civil servant, tireless "But the interventions madeat this meeting
in his own country on behalf of reason and by Asiatic, African, and South Americandele-
freedom, and in Milan a powerfully impres- gates have madem9 realise that this perspective
sive example of Romandignity of bearing, was altogether distorted. The proud people of
reminded the conference on the last day that the ancient lands who are now coming into
their ownin Asia and Africa, are not awaiting
"the contradictions of the free world wouldin- the decision of our European conflicts. They
deed sustain its enemies even more than their havestarted their political life as independent
ownstrength. Its manyunits hardly seem to nations on premises of their own for which
realise their essential unity, and makeancestral there is no precedent in Europe. Weshall not
memories morepotent guides to action than begin to understand them until we accept the
present needs. The strong and the weaknations, fact that in these newnations, .born of the most
the old and the new, alike allow themselves to ancient soil of the humanrace, we are facing
be affected in varying degrees in this fashion. our partners in the shaping of man’s destiny on
Someof the strong have not yet grasped at all, this planet. Theyare, of course, equal partners
somehave grasped only in part, and only one already by virtue of their statehood in the coun-
seems to have even approachedfull understand- sels of the United Nations. But their interven-
ing of AbrahamLincoln’s magnificent saying: tions at this Congress have revealed the power
’As I wouldnot be a slave, so I wouldnot be a of their political thought, which on a number
master.’ Slaves they will not be, but they seem of occasions has commanded not merely intellec-
not to have muchcompunctionabout remaining tual appreciation, but the respec.t due to true
masters. Whenceflows all that disruption of greatness of mind.
the humanspirit, that stream of ill-will and "I confess that it was for the first time that
anger that is connotated by the word ’colonial- the: exhilarating perspective was openedup to
ism.’... The people (of Asia and Africa) make me: of this immensearea of new companionship.
clear by their attitudes, and whenpossible, by Yet for all that, this encounter has brought
their words and actions, that in their view, us new cares. Wewere brought up against the
governmentby others, evenif good, is no substi- poverty of the areas held by the newAsiatic and
tute for self-government. The time ~or grate- Africannations, and the instability of their pub-
fulness maybe later, when foreign domination lic life. And having pondered these immense
has endedand the goodthat it did lives after it. problems, the conference could do little more
thzn pass on in silence. The only result was to
Professor Michael Polanyi who, with Pro- give us a new sense of proportion, in which our
fessors Aron and Hook, and M. Nabokov, Europeanconflicts could be seen as a fragment,
conceived the conference and guided it, rather than as a whole of the contemporary
~
expressed the new sensitivity of many scene.

Edward Shils

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED
Comment

"Comrade Prince" Waste Land" was certainly one of the many


arguments which made Dim a Marxist, but
A LONO-ST^Nn~NG friend of Dmitri Mirsky(it is recognition of what a poemsays should not
hardly kind to his memoryto refer t,o him as lessen one’s admirationof its technical qualities.
"Prince," let alone "ComradePrince ’), I was To do so would indeed be to allow Marxismto
both fascinated and moved--in more than one warpone’s judgment, incidentally; it prevents
way--by Mr. EdmundWilson’s account of him one’s thinking, as Dimdid, that Belinski said
in the July ENCOUNTER. (I was, of course, re- sensible things in shockinglyvulgar prose.
sponsible for the English version of his Intelli- 4" Mr. Wilson recognises that in fact Dim
gentsia of Great Britain.) Though’ at times thoroughlyenjoyed his trip to Central Asia. Yet
neither the cameranor the manbehind it seemed he cannot resist suggesting that he was sent
to have any inkling of the workings of the there as a punishment. But this was a trip to-
mind of "Dim," on the other hand they do give wards which Dim was looking forward while
us a numberof shots of striking verisimilitude, still in London,and he was, of course, very glad
for whichwe have to be grateful. to have madeit; I rememberhim writing to me
There are, however, not unimportant points on his return to Moscow to that effect.
regarding which from my own more special There remains one other matter, and this, I
knowledgeI feel I should say something. regret to say, is of extremeg,ravity to manywho
~. Quoting Dim (by which name his inti- knew him intimately: Dims end. For all my
mates knewhim) as remarking that the speeches grave doubts that he mayhave fallen a victim
of God the Father in Milton were "an awful to Stalin’s terrorisation of the countryinto abso-
bore," Mr. Wilsongoes on to conclude that this lute subservience, I must protest with all the
view was subsequent to acceptance of the Marx- vigour I can that the letter about him allegedly
ist outlook. Oh no l I rememberDim, back in from a Russian displaced person in Europe
his pre-Marxist days, discussing the English which you print in translation simply does not
poets with mehe was trying to persuade me to ring true. It is almost certainly a rather clumsy
write a history of English poetry--and complain- fake, and one cannot help feeling sorry that it
ing of the vast aridities of Milton. (In which should have been published so uncritically. Dim
concurred, my own boredom too preceding my is almost certainly no longer living, but no good
first acquaintance with Marxismby very many is done, merelymuchpain caused, by the publi-
years.) If Mr. Wilsonwishes to be teleological cation of unverifiable yarns of this sort.
in his interpretation, it wouldbe truer to say ALECBROWr~
that it was such "kanitel ’’ as Milton’s epic Stubhampton Gate
(kanitel is a Russian word which means Tarrant Gunville
miserably and naggingly boring) that helped to Blandford, Dorset
makea Marxist of him.
2. To use a favourite saying of Dim’s--I well [Mr. Wilsonreplies:
recall him levelling it at myself--Mr.Wilsonis In answer to Mr. Brown’sletter, I can only
far too often inclined to seek midi ~ quatorze submit, as counter-evidence, the following pas-
heures. For instance, he simply cannot allow sages fromletters written meby a Russianfriend
"Marxist" Dimany normal, humdrumthoughts, of Mirsky’s--Mrs. Vera Traill, of 3 Drayton
such as that his Moscow (the capital city) will Gardens, London--whichshe has given me per-
not necessarily put on Leningrad’s plays--much missionto quote:
as Londonwould not necessarily follow Man- "I found it quite amazingthat somebodywho
chester. Nor will Mr. Wilson even allow him knew Dim very little (as you say you did)
his never-dyingdelight in leg-pulls. could speak of him with such penetration. I
3. Mr. Wilson suggests some profound con- knew him most of my adult life, he was my
tradiction betweenDim’s thinking Mr. Eliot a very closest friend, and there is nothing I could
great poet, and "The Waste Land" a document add to what you say, and nothing I can disagree
on the decadenceof capitalist society. Whaton with ....
earth can it be? The picture of decay in "The "I arrived in Moscowin August x936 and
~9

PRODUCED 2003 BY UNZ.ORG


ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED

You might also like