Sunny Side (Version 2) — Chapter 2: Men of Letters

I

John Penquarto looked round his diminutive bed-sitting-room with a feeling of excitement not unmixed with awe.

So this was London!

The new life had begun.

With a beating heart he unpacked his bag and set out his simple belongings.

First his books, his treasured books; where should he put them?

It was comforting to think that, wherever they stood, they would be within reach of his hand as he lay in bed.

He placed them on the window-sill and read their titles again reverently: "Half-Hours with our Water-Beetles," "The Fretworker's Companion" and "Strenuous Days in Simla."

He owed everything to them.

And what an air they gave the room!

But not such an air as was given by his other treasure--the photograph of Mary.

Mary!

He had only met her once, and that was twenty years ago, at his native Polwollop.

He had gone to the big house with a message for Mr. Trevena, her ladyship's butler: "Mother's respects, and she has found the other shirt-front and will send it up as soon as it is dry."

He had often taken a similar message, for Mrs. Penquarto did the washing for the upper servants at the Hall, but somehow he had known that to-day was going to be different.

There, just inside the gates, was Mary.

He was only six, but even then he knew that never would he see again anything so beautiful.

She was five;

but there was something in her manner of holding herself and the imperious tilt of her head which made her seem almost five-and-a-half.

"I'm Mary," she said.

He wanted to say that he was John, but could not.

He stood there tongue-tied.

"I love you," she went on.

His heart beat tumultuously.

He felt suffocated.

He longed to say, "So do I," but was afraid that it was not good English.

Even then he knew that he must be a writer when he grew up.

She leant forward and kissed him.

He realized suddenly that he was in love.

The need for self-expression was strong upon him.

Shyly he brought out his last acid-drop and shared it with her.

He had never seen her since, but even now, twenty years after, he could not eat an acid-drop without emotion, and a whole bag of them brought the scene back so visibly as to be almost a pain.

Yes, he was to be a writer; there could be no doubt about that.

Everybody had noticed it.

The Vicar had said, "Johnny will never do any good at Polwollop, I fear"; and the farmer for whom John scared rooks had said, "Thiccy la-ad seems daft-like," and one after another of Mrs. Penquarto's friends had given similar testimony.

And now here he was, at twenty-six, in the little bed-sitting-room in Bloomsbury, ready to write the great novel which should take London by storm.

Polwollop seemed a hundred years away.

Feverishly he seized pen and paper and began to wonder what to write.

II

It was near the Albert Memorial that the great inspiration came to him some weeks later.

Those had been weeks of mingled hope and despair; of hope as he had fondled again his treasured books and read their titles, or gazed at the photograph of Mary; of despair as he had taken off his belt and counted out his rapidly-decreasing stock of money, or reflected that he was as far from completing his novel as ever.

Sometimes in the search for an idea he had frequented the restaurants where the great Samuel Johnson himself had eaten, and sometimes he had frequented other restaurants where even the great Samuel Johnson himself had been unable to eat.

Often he had gone into the British Museum and leant against a mummy-case, or taken a 'bus to Chelsea and pressed his forehead against the brass-plate which marked Carlyle's house, but no inspiration had come.

And then suddenly, quite close to the Albert Memorial, he knew.

He would write a novel about a boy called William who had lived in Cornwall, and who came to London and wrote a novel, a novel of which "The Westminster Gazette" said: "This novel undoubtedly places the author in the front rank of living novelists."

William's novel would be a realistic account of--yes, that was it--of a boy called Henry, who had lived in Cornwall, and who came to London and wrote a novel, a novel of which "The Morning Post" said: "By this novel the author has indubitably established his claim to be reckoned among the few living novelists who count."

But stay!

What should this novel of Henry's be about?

It would be necessary to describe it.

For an hour he wrestled with the problem, and then he had another inspiration.

Henry's novel would be about a boy called Thomas who had lived in Cornwall and who came to London and wrote a novel {about a boy called Stephen who had lived in Cornwall, and who came to London and wrote a novel (about a boy called Michael who had lived in Cornwall, and who came to London and wrote a novel (about a boy called Peter, who had lived in Cornwall, and ...

) ...

And so on.

And every one of the novels would establish the author's right to be reckoned, etc. , and place him undoubtedly in the very front rank.

It was a stupendous idea.

For a moment John was almost paralysed at contemplation of it.

There seemed to be no end to his novel as he had planned it.

Was it too much for his powers?

There was only one way to find out.

He hurried back to his bed-sitting-room, seized a pen and began to write.

III

It was two years later.

For the last fortnight John Penquarto had stopped counting the money in his belt.

There was none left.

For a fortnight now he had been living on the belt itself.

But a great hope had always sustained him.

One day he would hear from the publisher to whom he had sent his novel a year ago.

And now at last the letter had come, and he was seated in the office of the great Mr. Pump himself.

His heart beat rapidly.

He felt suffocated.

"Well, Mr. Penquarto," said the smiling publisher, "I may say at once that we like your novel.

We should have written before, but we have only just finished reading it.

It is a little long--about two million eight hundred thousand words, I reckon it--but I have a suggestion to make which will meet that difficulty.

I suggest that we publish it in half a dozen volumes, stopping, for the first volume, at the Press notices of (say) Peter's novel.

We find that the public likes these continuous books.

About terms.

We will send an agreement along to-morrow.

Naturally, as this is a first book, we can only pay a nominal sum on account of royalties.

Say ten thousand pounds.

How will that suit you?"

With a heart still beating John left the office five minutes later and bought a new belt.

Then he went to a restaurant where Goldsmith had never been and ordered a joint and two veg.

Success had come!

IV

I should like to dwell upon the weeks which followed.

I should like to tell of John's emotion when he saw his first proofs and of the printer's emotion when he saw what a mess John had made of them.

I should like to describe how my hero's heart beat during the anxious days of waiting; to picture to you his pride at the arrival of his six free copies, and his landlady's surprise when he presented her with one.

Above all, I should like to bring home to you the eagerness with which he bought and opened "The Times Literary Supplement" and read his first review: "'William Trewulliam--The First Phase.'

By John Penquarto, 7-1/2 by 5-1/4, 896 pp. , Albert Pump.

9s.

n." I have no time to go into these matters, nor have I time in which to give at length his later Press cuttings, in which there was displayed a unanimity of opinion that John Penquarto was now in the front rank of living novelists, one of the limited number whose work really counted.

I

must hurry on.

It was a week after the publication of "William Trewulliam," the novel which had taken all London by storm.

In all the drawing-rooms of Mayfair, in all the clubs of Pall Mall, people were asking each other, "Who is John Penquarto?"

Nobody knew--save one.

Lady Mary knew.

It was not the name Penquarto which had told her; it was--yes, you have guessed--the scene at the beginning of the book, when William Trewulliam meets the little Anne and shares his last raspberry-drop with her.

Even under this disguise she recognized that early meeting.

She pierced beneath the imagination of the novelist to the recollection of the man.

John Penquarto--of course!

Now she remembered the name.

It had always been a mystery to her friends why Lady Mary had never married.

No girl in Society had been more eagerly courted.

It was whispered that already she had refused more than one Archbishop, three Newspaper Proprietors and a couple of Dukes.

Something, she scarcely knew what, told her that this was not love.

She must wait.

As she dressed to go to the Duchess of Bilberry's "At Home," she wondered if she would ever meet John Penquarto again, and if he had altered.

"Mary!"

It was John speaking.

He had seen her the moment she came in at the door.

Something--was it the Duchess's champagne at dinner?

--had reminded him of the acid-drop they had eaten together and this had brought back his memories in a flood.

To-night he would meet her again.

He knew it instinctively.

Besides, it was like this that William Trewulliam had met Anne again, and Henry Polhenery had met Sarah, and Thomas Pentummas had met Alice, and--well, anyhow he knew.

"John!"

It was Mary speaking.

Perhaps you had guessed.

"You knew me?"

(This is John.

It was his turn.

) "I knew you."

(Said Mary.

) "Do you remember--" Mary blushed, and John did not deviate from the healthy red colour which he had maintained throughout the conversation.

In spite of his success he was never quite at ease in society at this period of his life.

Nor were Henry Polhenery and Thomas Pentummas.

They remained handsome but awkward, which was why women loved them so.

"I love you," (John speaking.

) "I think I must have always loved you."

(Mary going it.

) He took her hand in his.

Nobody noticed them.

They were as much alone as if they had been at the National Gallery together.

Many of the guests were going through similar scenes of recognition and love-making; others were asking each other if they had read "William Trewulliam" yet, and lying about it others again were making for the buffet.

John and Mary had the world to themselves....

V

They were married a month later.

John, who did not look his best in a frock-coat, had pleaded for a quiet wedding, and only the Duchess of Bilberry and Mr. Pump were present at the simple ceremony which took place at the Bloomsbury registry-office.

Then the happy couple drove away.

And where are they spending the honeymoon?

Ah, do you need to ask?

"At Greenwich?"

No, fathead, not at Greenwich.

"At Clacton-on-Sea?"

Look here, I don't believe you're trying.

Have another shot....

Yes, dear reader, you are right.

They are going back to Polwollop.

It might be a good plan to leave them there.

THE COMPLETE DRAMATIST

I take it that every able-bodied man and woman in this country wants to write a play.

Since the news first got about that Orlando What's-his-name made £50,000 out of "The Crimson Sponge," there has been a feeling that only through the medium of the stage can literary art find its true expression.

The successful playwright is indeed a man to be envied.

Leaving aside for the moment the question of super-tax, the prizes which fall to his lot are worth something of an effort.

He sees his name (correctly spelt) on 'buses which go to such different spots as Hammersmith and West Norwood, and his name (spelt incorrectly) beneath the photograph of somebody else in "The Illustrated Butler."

He is a welcome figure at the garden-parties of the elect, who are always ready to encourage him by accepting free seats for his play; actor-managers nod to him; editors allow him to contribute without charge to a symposium on the price of golf balls.

In short he becomes a "prominent figure in London Society"--and, if he is not careful, somebody will say so.

But even the unsuccessful dramatist has his moments.

I knew a young man who married somebody else's mother, and was allowed by her fourteen gardeners to amuse himself sometimes by rolling the tennis-court.

It was an unsatisfying life; and when rash acquaintances asked him what he did, he used to say that he was for the Bar.

Now he says he is writing a play--and we look round the spacious lawns and terraces and marvel at the run his last one must have had.

However, I assume that you who read this are actually in need of the dibs.

Your play must be not merely a good play, but a successful one.

How shall this success be achieved?

Frankly I cannot always say.

If you came to me and said, "I am on the Stock Exchange, and bulls are going down," or up, or sideways, or whatever it might be; "there's no money to be made in the City nowadays, and I want to write a play instead.

How shall I do it?"

--well, I couldn't help you.

But suppose you said, "I'm fond of writing; my people always say my letters home are good enough for 'Punch.'

I've got a little idea for a play about a man and a woman and another woman, and--but perhaps I'd better keep the plot a secret for the moment.

Anyhow it's jolly exciting, and I can do the dialogue all right.

The only thing is, I don't know anything about technique and stagecraft and the three unities and that sort of rot.

Can you give me a few hints?"

--suppose you spoke to me like this, then I could do something for you.

"My dear Sir," I should reply (or Madam), "you have come to the right shop.

Lend me your ear for ten minutes, and you shall learn just what stagecraft is."

And I should begin with a short homily on SOLILOQUY

If you ever read your "Shakespeare"--and no dramatist should despise the works of another dramatist; he may always pick up something in them which may be useful for his next play--if you ever read your "Shakespeare," it is possible that you have come across this passage: "_Enter_ Hamlet.

_Ham.

_ To be, or not to be--" And, so on in the same vein for some thirty lines.

These few remarks are called a soliloquy, being addressed rather to the world in general than to any particular person on the stage.

Now the object of this soliloquy is plain.

The dramatist wished us to know the thoughts which were passing through Hamlet's mind, and it was the only way he could think of in which to do it.

Of course, a really good actor can often give a clue to the feelings of a character simply by facial expression.

There are ways of shifting the eyebrows, distending the nostrils, and exploring the lower molars with the tongue by which it is possible to denote respectively Surprise, Defiance and Doubt.

Indeed, irresolution being the keynote of Hamlet's soliloquy, a clever player could to some extent indicate the whole thirty lines by a silent working of the jaw.

But at the same time it would be idle to deny that he would miss the finer shades of the dramatist's meaning.

"The insolence of office, and the spurns"--to take only one line--would tax the most elastic face.

So the soliloquy came into being.

We moderns, however, see the absurdity of it.

In real life no one thinks aloud or in an empty room.

The up-to-date dramatist must certainly avoid this hallmark of the old-fashioned play.

What, then, is to be done?

If it be granted, first, that the thoughts of a certain character should be known to the audience, and, secondly, that soliloquy, or the habit of thinking aloud, is in opposition to modern stage technique, how shall a soliloquy be avoided without damage to the play?

Well, there are more ways than one; and now we come to what is meant by stagecraft.

Stagecraft is the art of getting over these and other difficulties, and (if possible) getting over them in a showy manner, so that people will say, "How remarkable his stagecraft is for so young a writer," when otherwise they mightn't have noticed it at all.

Thus, in this play we have been talking about, an easy way of avoiding Hamlet's soliloquy would be for Ophelia to speak first.

_Oph.

_ What are you thinking about, my lord?

_Ham.

_ I am wondering whether to be or not to be, whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer-- And so on, till you get to the end, when Ophelia might say, "Ah, yes," or something non-committal of that sort.

This would be an easy way of doing it, but it would not be the best way, for the reason that it is too easy to call attention to itself.

What you want is to make it clear that you are conveying Hamlet's thoughts to the audience in rather a clever manner.

That this can now be done we have to thank the well-known inventor of the telephone.

(I forget his name.

) The telephone has revolutionized the stage; with its aid you can convey anything you like across the footlights.

In the old badly-made play it was frequently necessary for one of the characters to take the audience into his confidence.

"Having disposed of my uncle's body," he would say to the stout lady in the third row of the stalls, "I now have leisure in which to search for the will.

But first to lock the door lest I should be interrupted by Harold Wotnott."

In the modern well-constructed play he simply rings up an imaginary confederate and tells him what he is going to do.

Could anything be more natural?

Let us, to give an example of how this method works, go back again to the play we have been discussing.

_Enter_ Hamlet.

_He walks quickly across the room to the telephone, and takes up the receiver impatiently.

_ _Ham_.

Hallo!

Hallo!

I want double-nine--hal-_lo_!

I want double-nine two--hal-_lo_!

Double-nine two three, Elsinore....

Double-_nine_, yes....

Hallo, is that you, Horatio?

Hamlet speaking.

I say, I've been wondering about this business.

To be or not to be, that is the question;

whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows--What?

No, Hamlet speaking.

_What_?

Aren't you Horatio?

I want double-nine two three--sorry....

Is that you, Exchange?

You gave me double-_five_, I want double-_nine_....

Hallo, is that you, Horatio?

Hamlet speaking.

I've been wondering about this business.

To be or not to be, that is the--What?

No, I said, To _be_ or _not_ to be....

No, "be"--b-e. Yes, that's right.

To be or not to be, that is the question; whether 'tis nobler-- And so on.

You see how effective it is.

But there is still another way of avoiding the soliloquy, which is sometimes used with good results.

It is to let Hamlet, if that happen to be the name of your character, enter with a small dog, pet falcon, mongoose, tame bear or whatever animal is most in keeping with the part, and confide in this animal such sorrows, hopes or secret history as the audience has got to know.

This has the additional advantage of putting the audience immediately in sympathy with your hero.

"How _sweet_ of him," all the ladies say, "to tell his little bantam about it!"

If you are not yet tired (as I am) of the Prince of Denmark, I will explain (for the last time) how a modern author might re-write his speech.

_Enter_ Hamlet _with his favourite_ boar-hound.

_Ham.

(to B. -H.

)_.

To be or not to be--ah, Fido, Fido!

That is the question--eh, old Fido, boy?

Whether 'tis nobler in--how now, a rat!

Rats, Fido, _fetch_ 'em--in the mind to suffer the slings and--_down_, Sir!

--arrows--put it down!

Arrows of--_drop_ it, Fido; good old dog-- And so on.

Which strikes me as rather sweet and natural.

Let us now pass on to the very important question of EXITS AND ENTRANCES

To the young playwright, the difficulty of getting his characters on to the stage would seem much less than the difficulty of finding them something to say when they are there.

He writes gaily and without hesitation "_Enter_ Lord Arthur Fluffinose," and only then begins to bite the end of his penholder and gaze round his library for inspiration.

Yet it is on that one word "Enter" that his reputation for dramatic technique will hang.

Why did Lord Arthur Fluffinose enter?

The obvious answer, that the firm which is mentioned in the programme as supplying his trousers would be annoyed if he didn't, is not enough; nor is it enough to say that the whole plot of the piece hinges on him, and that without him the drama would languish.

What the critic wants to know is why Lord Arthur chose that very moment to come in--the very moment when Lady Larkspur was left alone in the oak-beamed hall of Larkspur Towers.

Was it only a coincidence?

And if the young dramatist answers callously, "Yes," it simply shows that he has no feeling for the stage whatever.

In that case I needn't go on with this article.

However, it will be more convenient to assume, dear reader, that in your play Lord Arthur had a good reason for coming in.

If that be so, he must explain it.

It won't do to write like this:--- _Enter_ Lord Arthur.

Lady Larkspur _starts suddenly and turns towards him.

_ _Lady Larkspur_.

Arthur!

_You_ here?

(_He gives a nod of confirmation.

She pauses a moment, and then with a sudden passionate movement flings herself into his arms_.

) Take me away, Arthur.

I can't bear this life any longer.

Larkspur bit me again this morning for the _third_ time.

I want to get away from it all.

[_Swoons_.

] The subsequent scene may be so pathetic that on the hundredth night it is still bringing tears to the eyes of the fireman, but you must not expect to be treated as a serious dramatist.

You will see this for yourself if you consider the passage as it should properly have been written:-- _Enter_ Lord Arthur Fluffinose.

Lady Larkspur _looks at him with amazement_.

_Lady Larkspur_.

Arthur, what are _you_ doing here?

_Lord Arthur_.

I caught the 2. 3 from town.

It gets in at 3. 37, and I walked over from the station.

It's only a mile.

_(At this point he looks at the grandfather clock in the corner, and the audience, following his eyes, sees that it is seven minutes to four, which appears delightfully natural.

)_ I came to tell Larkspur to sell Bungoes.

They are going down.

_Lady Larkspur (folding her hands over her chest and gazing broodingly at the footlights)_.

Larkspur!

_Lord Arthur (anxiously)_.

What is it?

_(Suddenly.

)_ Has he been ill-treating you again?

_Lady Larkspur (flinging herself into his arms)_.