REVOLT OF YOUTH.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16359, 23 February 1921, Page 3

REVOLT OF YOUTH.

LORD ERNLE’S VIEW, Lord Ernie, who. as Mr Rowland Pro there. wrote “ The Psalms in Human ."Life” and other thoughtful volumes, seems to have turned onco more to philosophical writing after his Ministerial activity in the time of war. I n the ** Nineteenth Century 3 ’ he considers “The Revolt of Youth,” holding the balance judicially. On the whole, he says, the change in manners, customs, and fashions lias tended to increase the sincerity, naturalness, and ease of social life. It would not be difficult to defend each change either on its merits or as the expression of some established fact. Take, for instance, the cigarette. It used to be rumoured that the famous wife of a famous archbishop smoked on the roof of the palace, with a napkin round her head to keep the smell of her cigarette from her harr. Such a subterfuge implies ample space and an irremovable coiffure. Rut it is surely more honest to admit the pleasure of smoking than to plead the excuse of asthma, or to smoke everywhere rather than only up the bedroom chimney. The freedom to discuss questions of food is a legacy from the war, when domestic peace and comfort depended on finding substitutes for brood and meat, or sugar and butter. Health is an all-important factor in lift*. It is. and always has been, a subject of absorbing interest. Those who remember hansom cabs will also remember the use—patent to any observant pedestrian—to which their small looking-glasses were put. Women used them to adjust their hats, men to examine their tongues. Why should women be allowed to talk clothes and men forbidden to talk health? Convention was at variance with human nature when a subject- was tabooed in which many were more personally and unaffectedly interested, and on which they discoursed with more real feeling than on half the topics of conversation that were hot placed in Society’s Index. Short skirts may be defended on grounds of hygiene and common-sense, to say nothing of the facilities that they afford to statisticians of tabulating, without inquisitorial proceedings, the comparative prevalence of bandy legs among women and men. No one will deny that short skirts are more wholesome than trailing dresses, or that they assist the free and natural movement cl 1 the limbs. On a twentieth century divan it is as natural to sprawl as it is unnatural on a Chippendale settee; stiffness of attitude would be wholly artificial. To rest the elbows on the table may not be the acme of grace. But it is better than lifting the elbow so frequently as our forefathers. The modern practice may also be regarded as an act symbolic of the progress < f Pussyfoot. ~ Finally, our novels, with their detailed analysis of psychological problems, pay homage, by their choice and. presentation of their subjects, to the modern omnipotence of science ; they are a literary_ recognition of the intellectual portent of the last half-cen-tury. The examples that have been chosen aro superficial and even frivolous. Yet they illustrate the point. If ago wishes to be fair to the younger generation, as assuredly it does, it must not only recognise tlie effect of the war on the claims and mental attitude of youth. It must also realise the revolutionary character of-the changes, m which, when it was young and rebellious, itwJias itself assisted. A privilege that it has itself so extensively exercised can scarcely be denied to its successors. Other points might well bo borne in mind. That young people should desire greater freedom and independence is a natural consequence of the conditions bt which they lived during the war. The new spirit may, it probably does, express itself in ways which pain or irritate the older generation. .fudging, for instance, from t-lie correspondence in the Press, parents complain that it manifests itself in a want of filial respec t and an impatience of the restraints of home life. About such a charge it is unsafe to generalise. Too many circumstances remain unknown. Possibly the strain of the war has prematurely aged some parents as much as it has precociously aged their children : it may have weakened their mental elasticity without bringing to bear the mellowing infiuence which naturally accompanies the gradual advance of years- If this be so. it will have widened the gap. because it will have increased the difficulty of the older generation in adjusting their scales of value and sense 1 of proportion to new facts and con- ! ditions. •No doubt many traditional barriers \ a i'e being broken down, and among i them may be some of the external forms j ol respect. Bat when Jack and Jill, at a second meeting, adopt each other's Christian names, it. should not surprise a father, though it may momentarilv startle him. to be addressed as “ old bean.” If it implies his admission within the charmed circle of youth, he should be gratified rather than annoyed. Stronger evidence is required than seems to be forthcoming to justify tlie complaint that, in real essentials, the old and time-honoured relations between parents and their children are fundamentally altered. Too much must not be made of manifestations which have proved to be passing phases. At the end of the war. ami in tlie first months of peace, there was a marked deteriorat ion in the social manners of youth. Dropped cigarette cuds, for instance. littered our floors, burnt holes in our carpets, blistered our tables, scarred our man-tel-pieces. We need not allow them to sear our memories. The decay was temporary. It has passed away. Manners have lighted themselves with the disappearance of the roughness, hardships, and discomforts of the strenuous life in which the deterioration was bred.