MONSTERS

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 137, 11 June 1936, Page 28

MONSTERS

THE CKAZE FOE SIZE FIGURES AND AFFECTION

The departure from the Clyde of the Queen Mary naturally excited the curiosity and admiration of millions writes Ivor Brown in the "Manchester Guardian." Not long ago it seemed that the belief in "bigger and better" had dwindled, but the optimistic cult of the colossal has grown again. Ships had been called Leviathan before nowhere was Leviathan indeed, the last creative word to be spoken by a nation of shipbuilders, a far far bigger thing than we had ever done. Those who did not see or listen could read infinite statistics about the acreage of steel and timber and the myriads of pounds of paint which two hundred brushmen were still splashing on the appointed rods, poles, and perches of hull and The word "record" is extremely powerful in our time. We like to think of bigger scores at cricket and snorter times for races. The cult of the record leads to some preposterous activities, but not as a rule for long. Those American pole-squatters ana marathon dancers have surely thougnt of something new by now. But admiration of achievement in terms of snorting statistics is not admiration 01 achievement as such. The boy who is : most excited about Bradman s m °£" ■ strous batting averages may know the I least about' the personal essences ana t the style that is the batsman.

NO HERO. 1 Nor is the addiction to arithmetic ; accompanied as a rule by authentic and ; durable affection. If Bradman were < to make ten scores of less than twenty in his next five Test matches—fantastic possibility!—he would cease to be Bradman, the God-Caesar of Australian cricket, and would become less than the dust, a cause of contumely even, to the youngsters who know all the figures by heart and none of -the realities by eye. The less statistical admirers of the game would still, admire Bradman for what he was and is and will be, a player with a personality and not a mechanical accumulator of runs; a man, not a monstrous example of accuracy. . Bigness, whether of actual size or figures achieved, creates a kind ot wonder, and the Queen Mary is receiving that tribute in full. But it does not of necessity evoke a warmer liking, and one wonders whether this Leviathan, when the awe has passed, will be able to retain a great affection. Will "she" become a maritime person as well as a maritime machine, a queen commanding and retaining passionate loyalties, or will the favour depend mainly on the bulk and big assemblage and on the victory in the "bigger and better" campaign? _If the latter, then the favour is bound to terminate should the Cunard-White Star Company or any of its rivals ever resolve to go "bigger and better by an inch or by an ounce; statistical devotees are bound to worship any new idol which has had even a tenth of a cubit added to the old stature. When bulk is their argument the very essence of their faith is fickleless.

A DETERRENT. In anv case, size, stirring our wonder, is something of a deterrent to more cordial feelings. Sentiment is usually on the side of the small; the "little fellow" starts favourite. One may even feel sorry for a boxer who is as large as Camera; the crowd is so obviously eager to see the mighty overthrown, and it is not the big man's fault that he happens to be big. We gape at the monster and unfairly resent him. Chivalry supports his smaller opponent so eagerly that it defeats its own purpose. There is often a case for sympathising with the strong because they have lost most of the sympathy before the play or the bout begins. For that reason it is a great deal more difficult to create affection for an empire than for a nation. You can wave all the flags, exploit all the symbols, repeat all the slogans, and din it into the popular skull that the sun never sets on the unparalleled aggregation of races in your Empire. The popular mind may be superficially interested, but the popular heart is not deeply stirred. The democratic pulse would beat far more rapidly at an appeal to defend "Little England" than at a call to enlarge "Greater Britain." To assure a London costermonger that he has political cousins, albeit of a different colour, in Khatmandu is not, we may assume, to warm the cockles of a Cockney heart. The monstrous regiment of Imperial Nations may appeal to him at a Wembley Exhibition, a Durbar cmematically glorified, or during a royal celebration. But, as far as his workaday opinions are concerned, his "Orient" ends with the Clapton football team. China's claims on Western sympathy are legitimate indeed; it is ill fortune for China that she is both a distant and a large country. Had she been half the size she would have aroused double the interest during her recent misfortunes.

THE FATE OF LONDON. One can almost trace a law of arithmetical progression in regard to local loyalties—the larger land, the less devotion; reversely, the smaller the home the warmer the heart. The stranger who has left a tiny town or country and wandered far afield or aflood is most likely to weep at the strains ox "Home, Sweet Home." It is probable that the most sentimental of all English gatherings would be a reunion oi Rutlandshire men in Rangoon. There might be few heads to count, but the hearts of Oakham would be as large as cabbages and worn upon sleeves soon drenched with happy tears. London has long tended to defy affection, one can only like it in bits and pieces. It is not even a monster now, for a monster may have personality. It is a slab of population, a gigantic piece of unwieldy social mechanism, feu with yesterday's fields and copses and today sending out new suburbs like a sausage machine. . It is noteworthy that anybody who is wanting to play for sympathy seizes upon the word "little." I happened to observe this especially during performance of "Richard 11. It will, remembered that in this play Shakespeare so far forgave Richard for his tyrannical start as almost to fall in love with him; forgetting the Kings early and culpable petulance he lavished upon him the glories of the later poetry. In the task of transferring sympathy to the King he instinctively lingered on little matters. As soon as Richard is shown in his weakness- and on the verge of overthrow we hear of death playing a little scene, of "a small model of the barren earth," and reach the almost shameless pathos of

my I arse kingdom for a little grayc, A little, Uttlo grave. The Elizabethan audience was tougher than our own in many respects. It took the carnage with delight. It may have endured without a shudder or a laugh that worst couplet in all th ® Shakespearean text—l cannot believe it came from Shakespeare's hand, since! it immediately follows Richard s magnificent prison speech— The next news is I have tn London sent The heads of Oxford, Salisbury, Blunt, and Kent, A big bag. indeed for the executioner! The audience might stomach that an-riQuncement-.01l remorseless victory,

but these'same people could be touched to compassion by the exploitation of small ends to kingly greatness and by musings over little, little graves. Such merit lingers in diminutives. Human nature does not alter much in this respect. The monstrous, the mighty, the breaker of records, the winners of Schneider Cups and Atlantic blue ribands we admire and we applaud. Glasgow, which climbed to its chimney-tops like Rome to see triumphant Caesar when the Queen Mary left the yard and waters whence she sprang, will doubtless keep the great ship in warm affection. It was more than a ship; it was a proof of thwarted capacity and a symbol of recovery after the bleakest years in the history of the Clyde. We all, if we get the chance, shall gaze astonished and applaud the mighty thing. Travellers, walking their miles about the decks, will send home statistical postcards. But the hardest task of all will have been surmounted if the handicap of size be overcome, if the monster can rise above its own arithmetic and the biggest of ships be also a best-beloved.