Around 1915, the famous philosopher Russell became acquainted with the writer Lawrence by the introduction of Ottoline Morrell, the wife of a congressman who loved literature. Madame Ottoline, the hostess of the "Salon" who had supported many writers, believed that the two of them should respect each other. In fact, Russell and Lawrence did have similar feelings when they first met.
Russell later said in an essay: "What first drew me to Lawrence was a certain exuberant quality and a habit of challenging assumptions that men tended to take for granted." He was a professor at Cambridge University and a member of the Royal Society. However, at that time, "pacifism caused me (Russell) to have a violent revolt in my heart..." Lawrence came from a lower class, and had a very deep understanding of the damage to the human spirit in the early stage of capitalist industrialization, and his words were also quite fierce. . Inspired by this spirit of defiance, Russell seems to have found common ground in Lawrence. In the beginning, their relationship even "was as exhilarating as the bells at a wedding." (Russell)
Lawrence also felt a certain degree of fit from his communication with Russell. In a letter to a friend shortly afterward, he even said, "We have to form a revolutionary party. I've talked to all kinds of people about it - including Bertrand Russell." In Mrs. Ottoline's letter, he told: "Bertrand Russell wrote to me, and I felt a real, urgent feeling to get close to him..." Russell, when he first came into contact with Lawrence, was quite impressed by his vigor, "I like the enthusiasm and vitality of his feelings", so he introduced Lawrence into his circle of scholars, and let him have the influence of famous economics in Cambridge. Cairns and others met and visited their own home. Although Lawrence was extremely biased at the time when he said that scholars including Keynes were "insensitive, lifeless, and dead", Russell still believed that he was in the habit of "challenging assumptions that people tend to take for granted." Because Russell was often seen by others as too submissive to reason, he felt fresh and even alive, stimulated by Lawrence's "irrational" views.
At the beginning of their relationship, they planned to hold a series of lecture events in London in the autumn of that year (1915). The original idea was that Russell taught ethics, while Lawrence taught things like eternal existence. They even started looking for lecture halls. During this period, Lawrence was thrilled that he was able to touch a figure like Russell: "I am delighted from the heart that we are reuniting to one point. I wish he (Russell) would devote himself to the study of absolutism, to the eternal Research...he needs to have a real, practical, logical belief in eternity from which he can work - a belief in the absolute, the existence in eternity. That belief is very good and I'm happy (Letter to Lady Ottoline). In preparation for the speech, Russell also wrote a series of abstracts discussing sociopolitical ideas, which he sent to Lawrence. Although its content was criticized by Lawrence, Russell later published these lectures as "Principles of Social Renewal."
After a brief friendship "honeymoon" (which can indeed be measured in months), Russell first felt a lot of discomfort. In some of his letters to Russell, Lawrence used a lot of rude, sharp language. For example, when talking about another novelist Foster, he said, "Why can't he take a woman to fight for his basic, primitive existence." He thought: "When a man is with a woman, He's just repeating a known reaction on himself, not looking for a new one - discovery. It's like masturbating or venting." And said: "That's exactly what almost all Britons are doing. ." Also pointed out: "An ordinary Englishman of the educated class goes to a woman just to vent himself..." This "educated class", of course, includes the recipient Russell.
Lawrence is also aware of each other's inconsistencies. In a letter to Mrs. Ottoline, he said: "I had an argument with Russell about the lecture. He was unwilling to accept this idea of infinity, infinity and eternity as a real starting point in his philosophical thought. In another letter shortly after, Lawrence revealed: "I have been separated from Russell for a while, but this is a natural progression."
On Russell's side, the problem may be more serious. After a brief period of freshness, the philosopher's clear and rational thinking gradually gained the upper hand. Lawrence's theory and mocking remarks, which he thought were too extreme, made Russell increasingly disgusted. In general, Russell was a strong believer in democracy; Lawrence's letter said: "I do not believe in democratic management. I believe that laborers can only elect managers or supervisors in their immediate environment, and that's it. The election must be overhauled. Law...As the hierarchy rises, each class can elect a higher-level manager. The end that things must reach is a true head, which is the same as all organic matter must reach - by no means. A foolish republic run by a foolish president, but an elected king, a figure like Julius Caesar." Such remarks, Russell later commented: "He was long before politicians considered fascism. A whole set of fascist philosophy had been formed before dictatorship." And that Lawrence himself "envisioned in his imagination that when such a dictatorship was established, he would be this Julius Caesar." In this regard, Russell Said: It was "a sense of fundamental difference between us."
They interacted during the First World War, and Russell took a pacifist position and was adamantly opposed to war. But Lawrence accused Russell in one of his letters: "You, the fundamental you, need ultimate peace, which is not true at all. You are using indirect, hypocritical ways to satisfy your desire to slam and beat. Either in a direct and decent way and say, 'I hate all of you, liars and pigs, I'm here to meet you', or just delve into math, where you can be real. But, say To the angel of peace - no, I'd rather have a thousand Tirpitz than this role.
" reacted strongly. Although Lawrence accepted Russell's pacifist views as rooted in blood desires, it is completely unreasonable to call Russell "hypocritical". Does this charge suggest that Russell himself lacks some kind of insight into the nature of things? According to Russell's later recollection, the letter had a strong "destructive effect" on him. He was thinking about whether he didn't deserve to live, and even committed suicide.
Finally, Lawrence completely irritated Russell: "You (Russell) are the enemy of all mankind, full of lust for hatred. It is not the hatred of lies that inspires you, but the hatred of the people of flesh and blood, a kind of The desire for blood in a perverse mind. Why don't you admit it?" In such language, with such lines of thought, to criticize a sane pacifist, Russell was strongly inspired to reflect on Lawrence's beliefs.
On reflection, "a healthier response took its place." Russell thought Lawrence's beliefs were pathological, and decided to break with this pathological thinking. He told Lawrence that he was no longer a teacher, and I (Russell), was not his student.
Apart from these major conceptual issues, in other understandings, as the exchanges deepened, their differences became more and more exposed. Lawrence often accused Russell of being a man: "What's the use of living like you? I don't believe your class is going to be good. It's almost over, isn't it? You're headed into that damn boat as a businessman What is the use of the traveler language speaking to them, rhetoric? Why don't you get out of this whole show? Now a man must be a desperado, not a mentor or a preacher." Russell thought that Lawrence was only here Play with words. He has come a long way (than his status) and has become a more authentic outlaw than he (Lawrence). But Russell couldn't understand why Lawrence was still dissatisfied with himself.
Sometimes, perhaps not dissatisfied, Lawrence is such an attitude or style, but Russell still can't accept it. For example, Lawrence once wrote to Russell: "Never stop working and writing altogether, and be an animal rather than a machine tool. Never leave that social boat. For your self-respect, never be a trivial figure, a A mole, an animal that walks by feeling and never thinks. For God's sake, be a baby instead of an expert. Don't do anything else - but for God's sake, Begin to exist, and in the name of courage, start all over again, be a full baby." This letter made Russell seem to be mocking his own education, and therefore think that he is full of hostility. Through Lawrence's words and deeds, Russell argues that Lawrence did not really have a desire to make the world a better place, but was revelling in eloquent monologues about how bad the world was.
Lawrence's life has always been more embarrassing. Seeing Russell's wealth, when he wrote a letter, he said jokingly: "Oh, I also want to ask you, when you write your will, make sure to leave me a sum sufficient for me. Survival property. I wish you could live forever. But I want you to regard me as your heir to some extent." This remark also aroused Russell's disgust. Years later, he responded wryly: The only difficulty with this plan is that if I take it, I won't have any leftovers.
.jpeg)