When this novel first appeared in
book form a notion got about that I had been bolted
away with. Some reviewers maintained that the
work starting as a short story had got beyond the
writer’s control. One or two discovered
internal evidence of the fact, which seemed to amuse
them. They pointed out the limitations of the
narrative form. They argued that no man could
have been expected to talk all that time, and other
men to listen so long. It was not, they said,
very credible.
After thinking it over for something
like sixteen years, I am not so sure about that.
Men have been known, both in the tropics and in the
temperate zone, to sit up half the night ‘swapping
yarns’. This, however, is but one yarn,
yet with interruptions affording some measure of relief;
and in regard to the listeners’ endurance, the
postulate must be accepted that the story was interesting.
It is the necessary preliminary assumption. If
I hadn’t believed that it was interesting I
could never have begun to write it. As to the
mere physical possibility we all know that some speeches
in Parliament have taken nearer six than three hours
in delivery; whereas all that part of the book which
is Marlow’s narrative can be read through aloud,
I should say, in less than three hours. Besides—though
I have kept strictly all such insignificant details
out of the tale—we may presume that there
must have been refreshments on that night, a glass
of mineral water of some sort to help the narrator
on.
But, seriously, the truth of the matter
is, that my first thought was of a short story, concerned
only with the pilgrim ship episode; nothing more.
And that was a legitimate conception. After writing
a few pages, however, I became for some reason discontented
and I laid them aside for a time. I didn’t
take them out of the drawer till the late Mr. William
Blackwood suggested I should give something again to
his magazine.
It was only then that I perceived
that the pilgrim ship episode was a good starting-point
for a free and wandering tale; that it was an event,
too, which could conceivably colour the whole ‘sentiment
of existence’ in a simple and sensitive character.
But all these preliminary moods and stirrings of spirit
were rather obscure at the time, and they do not appear
clearer to me now after the lapse of so many years.
The few pages I had laid aside were
not without their weight in the choice of subject.
But the whole was re-written deliberately. When
I sat down to it I knew it would be a long book, though
I didn’t foresee that it would spread itself
over thirteen numbers of Maga.
I have been asked at times whether
this was not the book of mine I liked best. I
am a great foe to favouritism in public life, in private
life, and even in the delicate relationship of an
author to his works. As a matter of principle
I will have no favourites; but I don’t go so
far as to feel grieved and annoyed by the preference
some people give to my Lord Jim. I won’t
even say that I ‘fail to understand . . .’
No! But once I had occasion to be puzzled and
surprised.
A friend of mine returning from Italy
had talked with a lady there who did not like the
book. I regretted that, of course, but what surprised
me was the ground of her dislike. ‘You know,’
she said, ’it is all so morbid.’
The pronouncement gave me food for
an hour’s anxious thought. Finally I arrived
at the conclusion that, making due allowances for the
subject itself being rather foreign to women’s
normal sensibilities, the lady could not have been
an Italian. I wonder whether she was European
at all? In any case, no Latin temperament would
have perceived anything morbid in the acute consciousness
of lost honour. Such a consciousness may be wrong,
or it may be right, or it may be condemned as artificial;
and, perhaps, my Jim is not a type of wide commonness.
But I can safely assure my readers that he is not
the product of coldly perverted thinking. He’s
not a figure of Northern Mists either. One sunny
morning, in the commonplace surroundings of an Eastern
roadstead, I saw his form pass by—appealing—significant—under
a cloud—perfectly silent. Which is
as it should be. It was for me, with all the sympathy
of which I was capable, to seek fit words for his
meaning. He was ‘one of us’.
J.C.
1917.