THE
FORSYTE SAGA
By William Lyon Phelps
It is
impossible to say what books of our time will be read at the close of this
century; it is probable that many of the poems and tales of Kipling, the lyrics
of Housman, dramatic narratives by Masefield, some plays by Shaw and Barrie,
will for a long time survive their authors.
Among the
novels, I do not know of any that has or ought to have a better chance for the
future than the books written about the family of the Forsytes by John
Galsworthy. They at present hold about the same place in contemporary English
literature as is held in France by Romain Rolland's Jean Christophe. Both are works of great length
which reflect with remarkable accuracy the political, social, commercial,
artistic life and activity of the twentieth century, the one in England, the
other on the Continent.
Entirely apart
from their appeal as good novels, that is to say, apart from one's natural
interest in the plot and in the characters, both are social documents of great
value. If the future historian wishes to know English and Continental society
in the first quarter of the twentieth century, he will do well to give attention
and reflexion to these two works of "fiction."
John Galsworthy was just under
forty when in 1906 he published a novel called The Man of
Property. He had produced very little before this, but it took no
especial critical penetration to discover that the new book was a masterpiece.
The family of the Forsytes bore a striking resemblance to one another in basic
traits and ways of thinking, yet each was sharply individualised.
A new group of persons had been
added to British fiction. The word
"Property," as in Tennyson's Northern Farmer,
was the keynote, and before long it began to appear that one of the
most dramatic of contrasts was to be used as the subject. This is the struggle between the idea of
Property and the idea of Beauty-between the commercial, acquisitive
temperament and the more detached, but equally passionate artistic temperament.
Even in the
pursuit of beauty Mr. Soames Forsyte never forgot the idea of property. He was
a first-class business man in the city, but he was also an expert judge of
paintings, which he added to his collection. Oil and canvas do not
completely satisfy any healthy business man; so Soames added to his collection,
as the masterpiece in his gallery, an exquisitely beautiful woman whom he made
his wife.
The philosophy of love comes in here. What is love? Is it exclusively the idea of possession, which often is no more
dignified than the predatory instinct or is it the unalloyed wish that the
object of one's love should be as happy and secure as possible? No one can
truly and sincerely love Beauty either in the abstract or in the concrete if
one's eyes are clouded by predatory desire.
One must look at beauty without the wish to possess it if one is really
to appreciate beauty. A first-class French chef would look into the big front
window of a confectioner's shop and fully appreciate the art and taste that
created those delectable edibles; but a hungry boy who looked at the same
objects would not appreciate them critically at all.
The wife of Soames finds him odious,
so odious that we cannot altogether acquit her of guilt in marrying him; and
Soames, who as a Man of Property expected her to fulfill her contract, did not
make himself more physically attractive by insisting on his rights. She left
him for a man of exactly the opposite temperament.
When Mr. Galsworthy finished this
fine novel, he had no intention of going on with the history of the family. He
wrote many other novels and some remarkable plays, but nothing made the
impression on readers that had been produced by the Forsyte family. Nearly
twenty years later he returned to the theme, and at once his power as a
novelist seemed to rise; there is something in this family that calls out his
highest powers. When he discovered that
he had written five works of fiction on the Forsytes, three long novels and
two short stories, of which the brief interlude called Indian Summer of a Forsyte is an
impeccable and I hope imperishable work of art, he hit upon the happy idea of
assembling them into one prose epic, and calling the whole thing by the
ironical title of The Forsyte Saga.
It is my belief that for many years
to come the name of John Galsworthy will be associated with this work, in what
I fervently hope will be its expanded form.
For since the assembling of the five pieces Mr. Galsworthy has published
several other novels dealing with the family. -The 1,T% hite Monkey, The Silver Spoon and in 1928 he wrote FINIS with Swan Song. Here he kills Soames, and while he probably does not feel
quite so sad as Thackeray felt when he killed Colonel Newcome, I venture to say that he does not gaze on the corpse
of Soames with indifferent eyes. For to my mind the most interesting single
feature of this whole mighty epic is the development of the character of this
man.
Clyde Fitch used to say something that is no doubt true of
many works of the imagination; he said that he would carefully plan a play,
write his first act, and definitely decide what the leading characters should
say and do in the subsequent portions of the work. Then these provokingly
independent characters seemed to acquire, not only an independent existence,
but a power of will so strong that they insisted on doing and saying all kinds
of things which he tried in vain to prevent.
In The Man of Property Soames
Forsyte is a repulsive character; he is hated by his wife, by the reader, and
by the author. But in these later books Soames becomes almost an admirable
person, and we may say of him at the end in reviewing his life, that nothing
became him like the leaving of it-for he died nobly. Long before this
catastrophe, however, we have learned to admire, respect, and almost to love
Soames. Is it possible that Mr. Galsworthy had any notion of this spiritual progress
when he wrote The Man of Property, or
is it that in living so long with Soames he began to see his good points?
Dickens was a master in this kind of development. When we first meet Mr. Pickwick, he seems like the president of a service club as conceived by Sinclair Lewis; he is the butt of the whole company. Later Mr. Pickwick develops into a noble and maganimous gentleman, whom every right-minded person loves. Look at Dick Swiveller-when we first see him, he is no more than a guttersnipe. He develops into a true knight.