Now life is a very peculiar4 game, which differs in many important respects even from compulsory5 football. The Rugby scrimmage is mere6 child's play by the side of it. There's no possibility of shirking it. A medical certificate won't get you off; whether you like it or not, play you must in your appointed order. We are all unwilling7 competitors. Nobody asks our naked little souls beforehand whether they would prefer to be born into the game or to remain, unfleshed, in the limbo8 of non-existence. Willy nilly, every one of us is thrust into the world by an irresponsible act of two previous players; and once there, we must play out the set as best we may to the bitter end, however little we like it or the rules that order it.
That, it must be admitted, makes a grave distinction from the very outset between the game of human life and any other game with which we are commonly acquainted. It also makes it imperative9 upon the framers of the rules so to frame them that no one player shall have an unfair or unjust advantage over any of the others. And since the penalty of bad play, or bad success in the match, is death, misery10, starvation, it behoves the rule-makers to be more scrupulously11 particular as to fairness and equity12 than in any other game like cricket or tennis. It behoves them to see that all start fair, and that no hapless beginner is unduly13 handicapped. To compel men to take part in a match for dear life, whether they wish it or not, and then to insist that some of them shall wield14 bats and some mere broom-sticks, irrespective of height, weight, age, or bodily infirmity, is surely not fair. It justifies15 the committee in calling for a revision.
But things are far worse than even that in the game as actually played in Europe. What shall we say of rules which decide dogmatically that one set of players are hereditarily16 entitled to be always batting, while another set, less lucky, have to field for ever, and to be fined or imprisoned17 for not catching18? What shall we say of rules which give one group a perpetual right to free lunch in the tent, while the remainder have to pick up what they can for themselves by gleaning19 among the stubble? How justify20 the principle in accordance with which the captain on one side has an exclusive claim to the common ground of the club, and may charge every player exactly what he likes for the right to play upon it?—especially when the choice lies between playing on such terms, or being cast into the void, yourself and your family. And then to think that the ground thus tabooed by one particular member may be all Sutherlandshire, or, still worse, all Westminster! Decidedly, these rules call for instant revision; and the unprivileged players must be submissive indeed who consent to put up with them.
Friends and fellow-members, let us cry with one voice, "The links for the players!"
Once more, just look at the singular rule in our own All England club, by which certain assorted21 members possess a hereditary22 right to veto all decisions of the elective committee, merely because they happen to be their fathers' sons, and the club long ago very foolishly permitted the like privilege to their ancestors! That is an irrational23 interference with the liberty of the players which hardly anybody nowadays ventures to defend in principle, and which is only upheld in some half-hearted way (save in the case of that fossil anachronism, the Duke of Argyll) by supposed arguments of convenience. It won't last long now; there is talk in the committee of "mending or ending it." It shows the long-suffering nature of the poor blind players at this compulsory game of national football that they should ever for one moment permit so monstrous25 an assumption—permit the idea that one single player may wield a substantive26 voice and vote to outweigh27 tens of thousands of his fellow-members!
These questions of procedure, however, are after all small matters. It is the real hardships of the game that most need to be tackled. Why should one player be born into the sport with a prescriptive right to fill some easy place in the field, while another has to fag on from morning to night in the most uninteresting and fatiguing28 position? Why should paté de foie gras and champagne-cup in the tent be so unequally distributed? Why should those who have made fewest runs and done no fielding be admitted to partake of these luxuries, free of charge, while those who have borne the brunt of the fight, those who have suffered from the heat of the day, those who have contributed most to the honour of the victory, are turned loose, unfed, to do as they can for themselves by hook or by crook29 somehow? These are the questions some of us players are now beginning to ask ourselves; and we don't find them efficiently30 answered by the bald statement that we "want to play the game without the rules," and that we ought to be precious glad the legislators of the club haven't made them a hundred times harder against us.
No, no; the rules themselves must be altered. Time was, indeed, when people used to think they were made and ordained31 by divine authority. "Cum privilegio" was the motto of the captains. But we know very well now that every club settles its own standing32 orders, and that it can alter and modify them as fundamentally as it pleases. Lots of funny old saws are still uttered upon this subject—"There must always be rich and poor;" "You can't interfere24 with economical laws;" "If you were to divide up everything to-morrow, at the end of a fortnight you'd find the same differences and inequalities as ever." The last-named argument (I believe it considers itself by courtesy an argument) is one which no self-respecting Radical2 should so much as deign33 to answer. Nobody that I ever heard of for one moment proposed to "divide up everything," or, for that matter, anything: and the imputation34 that somebody did or does is a proof either of intentional35 malevolence36 or of crass37 stupidity. Neither should be encouraged; and you encourage them by pretending to take them seriously. It is the initial injustices38 of the game that we Radicals object to—the injustices which prevent us from all starting fair and having our even chance of picking up a livelihood40. We don't want to "divide up everything"—a most futile41 proceeding42; but we do want to untie43 the legs and release the arms of the handicapped players. To drop metaphor44 at last, it is the conditions we complain about. Alter the conditions, and there would be no need for division, summary or gradual. The game would work itself out spontaneously without your intervention45.
The injustice39 of the existing set of rules simply appals46 the Radical. Yet oddly enough, this injustice itself appeals rather to the comparative looker-on than to the heavily-handicapped players in person. They, poor creatures, dragging their log in patience, have grown so accustomed to regarding the world as another man's oyster47, that they put up uncomplainingly for the most part with the most patent inequalities. Perhaps 'tis their want of imagination that makes them unable to conceive any other state of things as even possible—like the dog who accepts kicking as the natural fate of doghood. At any rate, you will find, if you look about you, that the chief reformers are not, as a rule, the ill-used classes themselves, but the sensitive and thinking souls who hate and loathe48 the injustice with which others are treated. Most of the best Radicals I have known were men of gentle birth and breeding. Not all: others, just as earnest, just as eager, just as chivalrous49, sprang from the masses. Yet the gently-reared preponderate50. It is a common Tory taunt51 to say that the battle is one between the Haves and the Have-nots. That is by no means true. It is between the selfish Haves, on one side, and the unselfish Haves, who wish to see something done for the Have-nots, on the other. As for the poor Have-nots themselves, they are mostly inarticulate. Indeed, the Tory almost admits as much when he alters his tone and describes the sympathising and active few as "paid agitators52."
For myself, however, I am a born Conservative. I hate to see any old custom or practice changed; unless, indeed, it is either foolish or wicked—like most existing ones.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
radicals
|
|
| n.激进分子( radical的名词复数 )；根基；基本原理；[数学]根数 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
compulsory
|
|
| n.强制的，必修的；规定的，义务的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
limbo
|
|
| n.地狱的边缘；监狱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
scrupulously
|
|
| adv.一丝不苟地；小心翼翼地，多顾虑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
equity
|
|
| n.公正，公平，（无固定利息的）股票 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
unduly
|
|
| adv.过度地，不适当地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
wield
|
|
| vt.行使，运用，支配；挥，使用(武器等) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
justifies
|
|
| 证明…有理( justify的第三人称单数 )； 为…辩护； 对…作出解释； 为…辩解（或辩护） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
hereditarily
|
|
| 世袭地，遗传地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
catching
|
|
| adj.易传染的，有魅力的，迷人的，接住 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
gleaning
|
|
| n.拾落穗，拾遗，落穗v.一点点地收集（资料、事实）( glean的现在分词 )；（收割后）拾穗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
assorted
|
|
| adj.各种各样的，各色俱备的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
hereditary
|
|
| adj.遗传的，遗传性的，可继承的，世袭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
irrational
|
|
| adj.无理性的，失去理性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
interfere
|
|
| v.(in)干涉，干预；(with)妨碍，打扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
substantive
|
|
| adj.表示实在的；本质的、实质性的；独立的；n.实词，实名词；独立存在的实体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
outweigh
|
|
| vt.比...更重，...更重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
fatiguing
|
|
| a.使人劳累的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
crook
|
|
| v.使弯曲；n.小偷，骗子，贼；弯曲(处) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
efficiently
|
|
| adv.高效率地，有能力地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
ordained
|
|
| v.任命（某人）为牧师( ordain的过去式和过去分词 )；授予（某人）圣职；（上帝、法律等）命令；判定 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
deign
|
|
| v. 屈尊, 惠允 ( 做某事) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
imputation
|
|
| n.归罪，责难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
intentional
|
|
| adj.故意的，有意（识）的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
malevolence
|
|
| n.恶意，狠毒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
crass
|
|
| adj.愚钝的，粗糙的；彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
injustices
|
|
| 不公平( injustice的名词复数 )； 非正义； 待…不公正； 冤枉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
injustice
|
|
| n.非正义，不公正，不公平，侵犯（别人的）权利 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
livelihood
|
|
| n.生计，谋生之道 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
futile
|
|
| adj.无效的，无用的，无希望的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
untie
|
|
| vt.解开，松开；解放 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
metaphor
|
|
| n.隐喻，暗喻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
appals
|
|
| v.使惊骇，使充满恐惧( appal的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
oyster
|
|
| n.牡蛎；沉默寡言的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
loathe
|
|
| v.厌恶，嫌恶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
chivalrous
|
|
| adj.武士精神的；对女人彬彬有礼的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
preponderate
|
|
| v.数目超过；占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
taunt
|
|
| n.辱骂，嘲弄；v.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
agitators
|
|
| n.（尤指政治变革的）鼓动者( agitator的名词复数 )；煽动者；搅拌器；搅拌机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |