MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD NICOLSON
rhE Times Literary Supplement on resuming its normal shape, as decorated its leading article with a reproduction of a
recent cartoon by Low. This cartoon represents the Prime Minister standing upon a snow-capped hill ; a symbolical figure is forcing to his lips a trumpet which is even longer and larger than those which are blown by monks in the valleys of Thibet ; the trumpet bears the device, "Inspiring blast to the nation" ; and the lady, who with a gesture at once determined and anxious is imposing this instrument upon Mr. Attlee, exclaims as she does so, "Blow, Clem, blow! " Much as I admire Low's curious felicity, both of draughts- manship and invention, I should not say that he is invariably fair. The gift of blowing inspiring blasts is not the highest of human capacities ; it is possessed, as I have indicated, by Thibetan monks. And among the many admirable qualities which the Prime Minister displays, that of blowing his own, or anybody else's, trumpet is not included. It is, I well know, a most human defect to attribute to persons misfortunes which are caused by events. There are those who, distressed by the persistence of Siberian winds, become angry with the Air Ministry, or even with the B.B.C., at the prolonged absence of the expected thaw. It is a similar weakness of mind or character which induces many citizens to ease their sense of national discomfort by complaining of lack of leadership. Nobody would deny that in the dark days of 1940 Mr. Churchill's historic utterances did both echo and magnify the will-power of the nation. Those lapidary sentences were as rocks hurled at our triumphant enemy ; they were about all we had at the moment which we could throw. But although Mr. Churchill's inspired leadership will remain for ever in our hearts and memories, I doubt whether we should be much aroused today if Mr. Attlee were to take the trumpet and announce blood, and sweat, and tears. The Fiihrerprinzip is not a tree which grows in this island.
* * * The present prolonged crisis is certainly complex and may be
transitional ; it is quite possible that things are going from bad to worse. But if Mr. Attlee were to start at this stage blowing blasts upon the trumpet, he might find either that he emitted sounds which he would afterwards regret, or that he had no wind left when the moment comes for the last trump. I am not among those, therefore, who complain that the Government do not give us sufficient lead. Their "Economic Survey" and their "Battle for Output" appear to me to be two most stertorous warnings: the public have been told of our calamities ; once they have absorbed this message, then they will accept more readily the harsh planning which must follow. To "give a lead" at this moment would imply making forecasts and promises ; it would be most imprudent at this stage to indulge in either. But whereas I understand the Government's hesitation to "lead," I cannot applaud their open avowal that they wish to be led. In the House of Lords a few weeks ago there occurred a debate which has not attracted sufficient attention. Lord Chatfield begged the Government to express themselves in favour of an Imperial War Memorial ; Lord Hall, in reply, stated that they would only consider the matter if pushed. "If at any time," he said, "an expression of public opinion of sufficient magnitude to warrant further consideration of this matter should emerge, together with a scheme which could be regarded as a suitable War Memorial, His Majesty's Government would then be prepared to give further thought to the question." That is a parliamentary, even a grandi- loquent, way of saying that the Government will not even begin to think about a War Memorial until the public tell them that they must begin to think. And how on earth are the public to exert such pressure? Surely the simpler course would be for the Ministry of Town and Country Planning to devise such a Memorial, for the Dominions thereafter to be officially consulted, and for a complete scheme then to be submitted for public approval and subscription.
* * No civilisation known to man has produced so much private elegance and so much public ugliness as that which existed in England during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Our cities and towns were defaced by the industrial revolution, and even in London itself the citizens observed without protest or even aware- ness the increasing desecration of their streets and squares. Yet the town and country houses of the rich were furnished with the utmost extravagance and decorated with the most exquisite taste. No country in the world could show such a wealth of parks and gardens, so lavish a catalogue of buildings of historic and artistic importance. One would have supposed that, with the collapse of the propertied classes and the advent to power of a Socialist adminis- tration, our aediles would have become aware of their opportunity. Now was the moment to give to the common man those aesthetic pleasures which in past centuries had been reserved for the aristocracy. Now was the moment to repair some at least of the damage done to our cities by the industrial revolution and to rescue from squalor and congestion the few magnificent public buildings that we retain. One would have supposed that the Ministry of Town and Country Planning would have welcomed the occasion to display to Londoners the beauties of St. Paul's, hitherto concealed by the outrages of commercial enterprise. I am assured that they have, in fact, taken this opportunity into consideration, and that plans are actually in existence which would give to St. Paul's a setting worthy of one of the greatest buildings ever designed by the mind of man. These plans, I am told, would give effective reality to the dreams which Wren first conceived. Arid London would thereby acquire a site and spectacle worthy of a great imperial capital. Surely a Socialist Government should have welcomed this chance to create a monument to their own public spirit. But Lord Chatfield is told that before any ideas of this sort can be considered there must be "a public opinion of sufficient magnitude."
*- * Let us suppose that the area around St. Paul's is cleared of the ruins by which it is now encumbered. Let us suppose that in their place there is laid down a vast lawn, as fine and tended as only this climate can produce. Supposing that beneath this lawn a shrine or crypt is excavated bearing the names of all the men and women, whether Service or civilian, who lost their lives in the war. Suppos- ing that the walls of this memorial chapel bear the names of all the regiments of the Dominions and dependencies that came to assist us in our hour of trouble. Surely such a memorial would not only be a fitting recognition of their sacrifice but provide this ancient capital with one site at least which was not disfigured by commercial buildings and marred by advertisements. I find it decorous and pleasant that the Cenotaph in Whitehall should have added to it the inscription linking in our memories the dead of two wars. Sir Edwin Lutyens' great monument will always remain as one of the finest of memorials ; it commemorates those who died in the fighting Services ; it does not commemorate those men, women and children who died during the bombardment of London; it does not explicitly commemorate the men of the Commonwealth and Empire. Lord Chatfield's appeal in the House of Lords was a serious and imagina- tive appeal ; it did not deserve so dusty an answer.
In 1945 the Coalition Government pledged their support to the War Memorials Advisory Council, of which Lord Chatfield is Chair- man, and on which are represented as many as fifty of our learned societies. In 1947 the present Government, in the person of Lord Hall, have refused to consider, unless pressure be exercised, Lord Chatfield's proposal for an Imperial War Memorial. Are we to believe that the citizens of this country, of the Commonwealth and Empire, desire no central memorial to those who were killed in the second German War? Are we to believe that the present Govern- ment are really indifferent to this opportunity to display the splen- dour of our architectural heritage? Are we to believe that the public as a whole, if told that we can now combine these two serious purposes, would fail to respond with generosity? I do not believe these things. I believe that if the Prime Minister were to grasp his trumpet and allow an inspiring blast to resound, he would find that it echoed across the Seven Seas.
Previous page
