MR. SHAW AND RUSSIA

Evening Post, Volume 32, Issue 32, 6 August 1931, Page 8

MR. SHAW AND RUSSIA

'•PLAYIXG- OSTKICHES"

CRITICS AND CRITICISM:

(To the Editor.) En, —The Kussopliobid with which "The Post" is.-.aflccted from time.to time must atsuiedlj; ha\e ieachc<l an acute stage judging by the tuade against Mi. G. B Shaw in tbc leading dilicle on &atuiday. A whole column is do\oted to exposing what is piesumcd to be the diamatists "self-conceit," but in a small concluding paragraph nc are intormed that his great est imperfection is the manner in which he has leiteiated expicssions of appioval 01 the Russian Revolution. At the outsei, we lu\e the monstrous, statement that "Mr. Bernard Shaw ha 3 plajed many paits, and iwo of the most successful ot them have been playing the fool and showing-off"; and that he has "made his leputation in large measure by these de vices." Were fcuch allegations justifiable, that /vast and tepresentative section ot intellectuals to whom Shavian philosophy mdkeo such a strong appeal must ponder —whether aftei all they Lave not been messmeribcd into a false beliet as easily as-if they were a set of morons, j.No diamatist could make a reputation and maintain it as Mr. Shaw haa,done were he the clown you, Sir, would have us believe. Judeed, many who aie stionglv opposed to his ideas do not question his ra..k as "a .philosopher and artist. Any btudent of Shaw must lealise that 'what would appear _to be blatant egotism f m the ordinary individual is merely a \ display of .humour on the part of i the dramatist. Thus ho refers, in .jocular vein, to one of his prefaces as having been written "in the author's most energetically egotistically fighting stylo." , "< You"" have been at pains to eJiow how peisistently Mr. Shaw disiegaids the con.ven.tions of English life, but what ;ybu are obviously sore" about is not his shortcomings in that respect, but the emphatic manner in which ho has expressed approv 'of the Soviet legimc. Seeing that Russia has t -ut into piactice the theories a social system, co strenuously advo cated by Mr. Shaw since he was first heaid ot, it would seem most unpiobable that he should tiouble to go all the way 'o Moscow merely, as jou suggest, to in dulge in a hUle "show mg oft " Coupling Shaw with H. G. Wells, you cast an unananted aspeiaon upon his ideals ,0f citizenship, merely because be asseits that the.Butish system ot. polity, and social system geneially, has outlived its period of usefulness; as if the piesent chaotic condition of that unfortunate country were not sufficient evidence of the tact.' &o far as Mr. Shaw's ideals of citizenship are concerned, he shall speak for himself. In an address delivered m 1010, he says: '^What eveiy man lias to keep befoie him is this: In the first place his country's claim on him, which is to benefit his life's work, which he must do to the veiy best of his ability; in return you must demand from your country a handsome, dignified, and sufficient subsistence." And it I may quote briefly from one of his piefaces: "I believe that any society which desires to found itself on a high standaid of integrity of character m its units should organise itself in such a fashion as to make it possible for all men and all women to maintain themselves in reasonable comfort by. their mdustiy without selling their affections and convictions." lie refers, of course, to conditions, which still exist, wherci y women are "condemned to attach themselves to 'bieadwinners* hcitly ,or illicitly, on pain of heavy privation and disadvantage/ and to the piotessional classes—journalists, 'lawyeis, doctors, clergymen, and politicians, "who are daily using, their highest faculties to belie their veal sentiments." While the journalist (liUc the lawyei) is willing to plead foi any cause so long as he is paid tor it, it will be difficult for the aveiagc pcison in this Dominion, who relies solely on the daily Piess toi mfoimation, to obtaini any "jjLcui'iite''""knbwle'dgis""'d'f"'''th <e"""cian'c]tti6nJß stmg in -Russia. The Press Association m undoubtedly biabed. The "Man--hester Guaidian," the only journal of v\y standing with a permanent coriesnondent in Russia, is scarcely ever quoted, but we are frequently tieated to e^ceipts no., the "Morning Post," the ultra-eon ,\ervative, which merely obtains humours from Riga, and Mike others of its kind does its best to distort the factt, con cerning the Soviet Republics so that they ibearv not the slightest semblance ot actuality. . The Ammican Press (we aie issured by Dr. R. M. Campbell, who ie centfy returned fiom U.S A.) is well lepieented in.Russia, and enoimous inteiebt st ken in Soviet affairs. Quite lecently 'Ihe Post" contained a> long aiticle luotmg the "Chicago Tribune's", cones oudent in Russia, who had interviewed anous foreign technicians there, and ailed to find any evidence of the alleged orced laboui. Probably, if we had more ■iewß from such sources we'should get a lttle nearer the truth in regard to similar illegations concerning that much maligned ountiy. In the meantime we ha\e moie than a suspicion that the only leal objec--1011 to the Sowets is made on behalt of hat section of the people to whom L'ueodoie Dneser refeis as "cousexvames nth something to conserve."—l am, etc, W.T.G.

(To the Editor.) ~ .- Sir,—l inubt apologisei foi* writing again so soon, but I see 1 that the*'process I called "poisoniug the wells" is still going on. Surely it must be evident 'to the majority of jour readers that>our Icadeis recently have been written solely' for the purpose of discrediting Miv Shaivf and his views. Tarn, howevei, going to change my metaphor, and to say that jciu have been "playing ostiiches," and that you are deliberately ignoring the real Russia and her future enecfon, not only JS Tew Zealand, but the whole,world. Several statements of modern conditions m Russia have been cited since the fiveyear plan has been in operation, but tho motive has been obscured. Tjie actual state of affairs is that'Rnssia has at last leeogmsed that she has natural resources'' of almost unlimited extent. Hei wheat, timber, and agricultural possibilities die well .known, but not so much her supplies of iion, coal, oil, platinum, indium, manganese, a&bestos, and hjdio-powei. It she once i& pioperly organised the lest of the woild may well tremble with apniehension.

What, then, is this five-year plan? Briefly; it is that the workers are working with: the ideal that the development V of: Russia is the only, thing worth while, i They are deliberately working under poor;conditions,s so r'tliat the profits which' accrue from Her operations can be used"; for •.< furtuCT developments, just as the horrible; conditions of the British indus-' trial workers 100 to ISO years ago built up the reserves-which have made Britain' the power she was up till 1914. The1 jdifi'erence,' however, is that, whereas the* wealth of Britain was allowed to get into" the hands'of the owners, in Russia the wealth is being used for the development of the State. There is no such thing as' royalties being paid to the owners of laud -which contains oil, coal, or iron deposits, and the farmers are-uot loaded down with crushing mortgages; also, and this is most important, the country is not beiug taxed1 for interest on external loans, as the money for development is coming from the present profits on trading free of in-: terest -Can any country fail to advance with such ideals, and will the workers and administrators not both be fired with1 tk~ same enthusiasm? ' This, then, is the -Russia we are' up; against, and, sir, with all respect, I consider thait it is little short' of criminal, for you to write columns of leading articles which savour of red herrings when a prob-: leni .'such as'this must be faced sooner oi-' lateral am, etc., ■'■■.'■ i \ '■■/' -'• ' ■?mE LAG- I •; :v[lhe correspondents .' accuse us . of; Russophobia and of writing "solely foi\ the purpose of discrediting. Mr. Shaw and, his views," because we refused to take1 his opinions -seriously, and even quoted his bwri previous, references to "cinematp-: r-graphic schoolboy nonsense" and "a dozen! of the most-, negligible cranks in Russia' : . . . corresponding with similar people, in England, both convinced that they are the liroletariat." Iv justification for ouiv -attitiidei. '6an"(juote "a rece.nt issue 6f"The Times'' Lit'evai-y Supplement. Pi-b----bably "W.V.tt." would dispose of that source as biased because "The Times" does

not maintain .a cfliTespondent in Russia, for the express reason that the Soviet would not allow him-: to report faithfully w hdt he sec-) The Literaiy Supplement ie\iewed eight publications-centring on the Five-Year Plan. Three were 'by Amu icans, two by Germans, one by a Gicco Rumanian, one" in French by a Russian, and cm. by V. M. Molotov, who has become Stalin's right hand. Some ot the witters had spent long penods in Russia befoie the Revolution and recently. All had studied their subject thoroughly. The American authoia presenbed facts mainly without comment, and the facts weie a raixtuie ot favourable and unfavourable. One of them said indeed "to predict how much of success and of failure will commingle in the yeais ahead appeals idle, e\en foolish." The tour other outside authors were acutely hottile, and they included Dr. , Karl Kautbky, who,' though he has not' been in Russia recently, is credited by, "The 'Times" with "an unequalled knowledge of the theoiy of Riaisian Socialism," and with having been on intimate terms for moie than fifty ye.ua -with the leadeis of Rus&nn Socialism, including Lenin and Trotsky. The only entirely favourablei review of the Five-Year Plan was by Molotov, who was reviewing that for which he was partly responsible Yet Air. Shaw i | goes to Russia, is entertained for about i& week by the authors of the Five-Year Plan, and comes back to gi\e an unprejudiced judgmentl And to ndicule him is ' Russophobu" and '"playina; ostiitheii!" —£d ] '