Only six weeks ago a group of Quakers published a pamphlet “towards a Quaker view of sex” sharply challenging the validity of the traditional approach towards sex, whether heterosexual or homosexual, and marriage.
Though they did not say anything other reformers had not said before, the publication was an event of social significance. Its importance lay in the fact that the Quakers, popularly known as The Brothers, are a deeply religious group. The leaders of the Church responded testily to the challenge. The Archbishop of Canterbury himself wrote an article to answer the issues raised by the Quakers. Their labours are hardly over when they are faced with a new challenge which is far more revolutionary in its implications.
This time the challenge to orthodoxy comes from within the Church. A practising Bishop, Dr John Robinson, has published a 141-page paperback under the title Honest to God, emphasising the need for liberating Christianity from its mythology. The bishop has rejected the concept of God as a separate supernatural entity. He is agnostic about the virgin birth. He rejects the concept of Christ being the son of God. His views on the crucifixion and prayer are equally heretical. In short, he has called into question the entire religious framework.
An Uproar
By comparison the political controversies caused by Dr Hewlett Johnson, popularly known as the Red Dean because of his pro-communist views, pale into insignificance. In this century Dr Robinson bears comparison, if at all, with only Dr Barnes who denied the virgin birth as a literal historic fact. But otherwise he fully respected the traditional approach to religion. No wonder there is an uproar and demand for the bishop’s resignation.
The bishop is an unusual person. A former Cambridge don, he was known both for his daring and erudition even before this publication. He appeared as a witness at the trial of Lady Chatterley’s Lover – in its defence. But he has not written the present book in a spirit of bravado, defiance or rebellion. After the title of the first chapter, “Reluctant Revolution”, he can appropriately be described as a reluctant revolutionary. The book is in the nature of a personal confession and carries ample evidence of the harsh struggle the bishop has had to go through. Not even his opponents have questioned his sincerity.
Like the Quakers, the bishop has not made any revolutionary contribution to human thought as such. The long quotations in the book bear testimony to the work of many others including well-known scientists like Julian Huxley and his grandfather, Thomas Huxley. But it is a different matter when an “insider” speaks out like Mr Khrushchev on the crimes of Stalin. That probably explains the appeal of the book. It was put on sale on March 18. The first print of 6,000 copies was sold out on the first day itself. The second print of 10,000 sold out before it reached the bookshops and a third print of 30,000 has been ordered.
*
Talking about writers and books in general, not many make such a big splash as the bishop and Honest To God. In the last fortnight, the writers have been the subject of much pity and comment. This has followed the publication of What Are Writers Worth! The answer must be: Unfortunately, not much. In terms of money they are worse off than the lowest paid unskilled workers. In terms of social prestige they have been demoted by the Registrar- General from social class one (professions) to class two (actors, teachers and musicians).
No one knows exactly how many writers there are in this country because the census lumps them with crossword compilers, caption writers, turf correspondents and so on. The rough guess is 6,500 to 7,000. Then there are about 5,000 others (mostly teachers) who write technical and educational books. Their worst enemy are the successful writers. Most people prefer borrowing books from the libraries to buying them. Also so many new titles are published every week that books inevitably have short lives. The Times Literary Supplement has put the life of a novel that does not make an immediate impact at three months.
In 1957 the Society of Authors published the results of a questionnaire it has circulated among its 3,000 members. About 600 replies were received. Only 82 were found to have earned more than £1,500 a year from writing alone and nearly 50 per cent “earned no more than £5 a week if that”. An average industrial worker earns £15 a week. As The Economist puts it, “perhaps they need a trade union”. Meanwhile, television and broadcasting are a help, but not for many. Advertising and public relations have solved the problem for many more. They are the lucky ones.
Three other groups of men in an even more glamorous profession who have been bemoaning their lot in this Welfare State these days are the Labour Members of Parliament. Unlike their Conservative colleagues, not many of them are directors of companies or own business or property which give them an unearned income. They have to make do with a salary of £1,000 a year plus £750 on expense account. If they attend a late night session and the last tube train and bus has left, some of them literally walk back home several miles away. They cannot afford taxis.
The Labour Party has poured contempt on the National Incomes Commission which was set up by the Government last year to help evolve a rational wage structure. The Trade Union Congress has boycotted it. The party is willing to accept the Commission’s award on the salary for MPs. Its chief whip said so in the House of Commons. He also quoted the figures for other comparable countries: Australia: £3,040; Canada: £3,740; France: more than £3,000; and Germany £2,500 to £3,000. I might add that the Prime Minister here is paid about half as much as the Chairman of the Railway Board and 4,500 civil servants more than junior ministers.
Tired MPs
British MPs have also been complaining about the load of work and lack of facilities. Seventeen members have died since the present House of Commons was elected in 1959 and 80 have been seriously ill. A medical man among them has been quoted as saying that a large number of MPs are suffering from chronic fatigue. Many of the road accidents in which MPs were involved might be largely due to chronic fatigue, he said, adding that the library was the only place where they could relax. British MPs can be seen writing letters in corridors.
As to the workload on Monday, the House meets from 2.30 to 10.30 p.m. On Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday committee meetings begin at 10.30 am. to be followed by sittings of the House which begin at 2.30 p.m. and go right up to midnight – a fourteen-hour-day. During the week-end, they travel to their constituencies if they are interested in retaining their seats. Membership of Parliament has become a full-time occupation. Also no member can make his mark unless he specialises in some subject.
*
In contrast to writers, MPs, teachers, nurses and others who are dissatisfied with conditions of work and life, the criminals here have no cause for grievance with society. They have never had it so good, ruefully confesses Scotland Yard.
Here is one typical week in Britain, picked up at random:
Monday: No major crime, Tuesday: £30,000 grabbed by a gang in the pay office of the Gas Board and £10,000 stolen from a pub owner’s home in London. Wednesday: Seven masked men rifled a mail train. Thursday: Gang looted a Peer’s castle in Kent; £800 worth of jewellery stolen in London; a stamp collection worth £2,000 -£3,000 stolen in London; one gang snatched jewels worth £700 in fashionable Mayfair. Friday: Goods worth £6,000 stolen in Belgravia, London’s poshest residential locality. Saturday: Jewellery worth £6,000 stolen in Chelsea. Sunday: Jewellery worth £5,000 stolen in London.
In this country drivers are afraid to take out precious goods in their lorries. Last year the value of goods stolen on the highways after the drivers were beaten up and gagged came to something like six million pounds. Elaborate precautions are being devised to deal with this menace. The result remains to be seen. Meanwhile barely one in four cases of theft, burglary and dacoity are detected and brought to court. There is, of course, an explanation for this low rate of detection. The police force is too small. It is too small because the pay is not attractive.
The Times of India, 31 March 1963