"
I should, indeed, mention that on my venturing to put to Mr. James a
question or two about his theory of such changes he replied that no
theory could be stated, at any rate in the off-hand manner that I seemed
to invite, without childish injustice to the various considerations by
which a writer is moved. These determinant reasons differ with the
context and the relations of parts to parts and to the total sense in a
way of which no a priori account can be given.
"I dare say I strike you," he went on, "as rather bewilderedly weighing
my words; but I may perhaps explain my so doing very much as I the other
day heard a more interesting fact explained. A distinguished English
naval expert happened to say to me that the comparative non-production
of airships in this country indicated, in addition to other causes, a
possible limitation of the British genius in that direction, and then on
my asking him why that class of craft shouldn't be within the compass of
the greatest makers of sea-ships, replied, after brief reflection:
'Because the airship is essentially a bad ship, and we English can't
make a bad ship well enough.' Can you pardon," Mr. James asked, "my
making an application of this to the question of one's amenability or
plasticity to the interview? The airship of the interview is for me a
bad ship, and I can't make a bad ship well enough.
Pages:
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363