THE MEANING OF MR. GALSWORTHY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 770, 19 March 1910, Page 10

THE MEANING OF MR. GALSWORTHY.

Mr. H. 'M. Richardson writes an interesting article in the "Millgato Monthly," on Mr. John Galsworthy; aud ho develops a. curious paradox. "Strife," it is saidj "was praised, mainly and - wrongly, for its impartiality," and this; Mr. Itichard(>ou thinks, is a mistake, but an excusable 'One, because the critics had not the key to Mr..Galsworthy's mind. "There is a kind, of impartiality as remote from neutrality as ii certain sort of abstemiousness is from asceticism." Mr. Galsworthy, it seems, is like the iiiaA who could not take a gkss of intoxicating drink without becoming a drunkard; ho is So passionately on. one side of the social argument that if ho rolaSed for a moment his ' grim impartiality he' must r'nsh to tho violent' extreme. And he will not do this, because- the Causes for which he caros so niuoh would be damaged by an open espousal. Mr. Richardson is ready for Mr. Galsworthy's disavowal; Ibsen-tesHly proclaimed himself nn artist and not a moralist, but those who understood knew .that his work, too, was "scorching aiid withering" to the old, bad order of things. It seems, however (observes the "Manchester Guardian") that besides those who understand and those, who think [Hr* Galsworthy is just an artist* there is a third party .which believes in' his didactio intention to proclaim tho virtues of arbitration in 'labour disputes. Mr. Galsworthy, clearly, is big enough to make a wido appeal, and we are sure .that what Mr.. Riohardson finds in him is not merely a figment of his fancy. But Wo cannot see that on Mr. Richardson's showing tho critics, few of whom can havo imagined Mi , Galsworthy as "holding no form of Creed, but. contemplating all," were wrong to prmse an impartiality that was the measure of his strength, or - that they should have gone behind- it to assure us that he is really not impartial at all Air. Richardson classifies "Strife" aS the drama of economics, nnd ho believes that the plays of the coming time "will deal P s »utl less with -personal heroisms, loves, lollies, and sins; and more anil moro with tho great social probleme, with individuals as symbols of conflict ing economic ideas/; Perhaps this might be put. more enticingly,' but we may ttgi'ec that -.-oven heroes, should have some relation to tho whole scheme of thiiies nnd that they have often been stunidlv detached from it. *