It is not appreciation of the artist that is necessary so much as appreciation of the art.It is difficult for an artist to live in an environment in which everything is judged by its utility, rather than by its intrinsic quality.The whole side of life of which art is the flower requires something which may be called disinterestedness, a capacity for direct enjoyment without thought of tomorrow's problems and difficulties.When people are amused by a joke they do not need to be persuaded that it will serve some important purpose.The same kind of direct pleasure is involved in any genuine appreciation of art.The struggle for life, the serious work of a trade or profession, is apt to make people too solemn for jokes and too pre-occupied for art.The easing of the struggle, the diminution in the hours of work, and the lightening of the burden of existence, which would result from a better economic system, could hardly fail to increase the joy of life and the vital energy, available for sheer delight in the world.And if this were achieved there would inevitably be more spontaneous pleasure in beautiful things, and more enjoyment of the work of artists.But none of these good results are to be expected from the mere removal of poverty: they all require also a diffused sense of freedom, and the absence of that feeling of oppression by a vast machine which now weighs down the individual spirit.I do not think State Socialism can give this sense of freedom, but some other forms of Socialism, which have absorbed what is true in Anarchist teaching, can give it to a degree of which capitalism is wholly incapable.
A general sense of progress and achievement is an immense stimulusto all forms of creative work.For this reason, a great deal will depend, not only in material ways, upon the question whether methods of production in industry and agriculture become stereotyped or continue to change rapidly as they have done during the last hundred years.Improved methods of production will be much more obviously than now to the interest of the community at large, when what every man receives is his due share of the total produce of labor.But there will probably not be any individuals with the same direct and intense interest in technical improvements as now belongs to the capitalist in manufacture.If the natural conservatism of the workers is not to prove stronger than their interest in increasing production, it will be necessary that, when better methods are introduced by the workers in any industry, part at least of the benefit should be allowed for a time to be retained by them.If this is done, it may be presumed that each Guild will be continually seeking for new processes or inventions, and will value those technical parts of scientific research which are useful for this purpose.With every improvement, the question will arise whether it is to be used to give more leisure or to increase the dividend of commodities.Where there is so much more leisure than there is now, there will be many more people with a knowledge of science or an understanding of art.The artist or scientific investigator will be far less cut off than he is at present from the average citizen, and this will almost inevitably be a stimulus to his creative energy.
I think we may fairly conclude that, from the point of view of all three requisites for art and science, namely, training, freedom and appreciation, State Socialism would largely fail to remove existing evils and would introduce new evils of its own; but Guild Socialism, or even Syndicalism, if it adopted a liberal policy toward those who preferred to work less than the usual number of hours at recognized occupations, might be immeasurably preferable to anything that is possible under the rule of capitalism.There are dangers, but they will all vanish if the importance of liberty is adequately acknowledged.In this as in nearly everything else, the road to all that is best is the road of freedom.
