ARNOLD KETTLEの"AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ENGLISH NOVEL" (VOL. II)をめぐって

抄録

According to A. Kettle's analysis, there is no 'great' novel in the twentieth century; he finds only a few 'good' novels. He says Edwardian novelists are 'narrow.' Though V. Woolf, D. H. Lawrence, James Joyce wrote against Edwardian novelists, they only took 'pessimism' for 'narrowness.' Aldous Huxley and Graham Greene tried to find out true significance of life only to fall deeper into despond. What is the reason of this total failure of the twentieth century English novel? According to A. Kettle's diagnosis, what is lacking in the twentieth century English novel is 'a basic conflict.' In this article I discuss A. Kettle's dictum on 3 points. (1) A. Kettle approaches the English novel from its 'matter' side. What is the matter' of the English novel? Liberty of the individual; religious, economic, and social liberty. From this point of view, the golden age of the English novel is the eighteenth century, and in the nineteenth century, the so-called Victorian Retreat' begins. However, we can not neglect the other way of approaching; namely, an approach from its 'form' side. Before Henry James, it is possible to understand the English novels chiefly from their 'matter'; but after Henry James, it is preferable to approach them from their 'form,' namely aesthetic beauty as an art. F. R. Leavis, far from admitting the so-called 'Victorian Retreat', contends that the truly great English novelists are Jane Austen, George Eliot, Henry James, Joseph Conrad, and D. H. Lawrence. To understand the English novel correctly, not only A. Kettle's dictum, but also F. R. Leavis's way of approaching must be taken into consideration, I think. (2) In English society which has the social homogeneity, there is a 'class-difference', but no 'class-consciousness.' In such society, the 'basic conflict' that is first to rise, is not a conflict between the governing class and the governed-class; perhaps, a conflict between the governing nation and the governed nation may be the first to appear. The novels of Joseph Conrad, E. M. Forster, Joyce Cary, George Orwell, and others are to be considered in this context, and A. Kettle's book is very suggestive in this point. (3) It is often said that historically we are now in a crisis. What is the nature of the present crisis? When the reality and the idea go side by side, we feel no strangeness; but one of them is forward and the other lags behind, we feel strangeness, and when the distance between them is very great, we feel anxiety; this is the nature of a crisis. In the present crisis, reality is forward, and idea lags behind. What should we do to find out our way through this crisis? Traditionalists disbelieve in 'progress,' and insist to make the reality go backwards to the point where the idea is lagging. A. Kettle is not for traditionalists's view of history. If we consider not only literature but also other human activities, is it not preferable to take sides with A. Kettle who believes in progress, not with T. S. Eliot a traditionalist?