Arthur Fifield and Chertkov: The Free Age Press

After writing my previous post I have found this article online by Holman which gives more details of Arthur Fifield and Chertkov (‘Translating Tolstoy for the Free Age Press: Vladimir Chertkov and His English Manager Arthur Fifield’, Holman, Michael J. De K., The Slavonic and East European Review, Vol 66, No 2, April 1988).  The article included information from a record written by Fifield.  “In 1933, at the request of Chertkov, with whom he had had no contact for a quarter of a century, Fifield wrote an account of his time as Manager of the FAP.  The account, a typewritten copy of which has been given to the present writer by A. Brandt Esq., bears the heading: THE FREE AGE PRESS (English Branch).  Joint Editors: V. Tchertkoff, A. C. Fifield, Manager: A. C. Fifield.  1900-1902.  A Brief Statement of Its Work, by A. C. Fifield, 1933.  Fifield’s Statement, which runs to some twenty-three closely typed pages, has been of considerable assistance to the present writer in the preparation of this article.”

“It was at Tamworth Hall that Chertkov first met Arthur Fifield.  Fifield, fourteen years Chertkov’s junior, was then in his late twenties.  He was a regular attender at the Brotherhood Church and, from September 1897, acted at Secretary for its weekly gatherings.  Of primary importance to Chertkov, however was the fact that, in addition to his Tolstoyan sympathies, Fifield had first-hand experience of the production and distribution of books in Britain. …When Chertkov left London for Essex, they remained in regular contact, exchanging letters and often coming together to discuss matters concerning  Chertkov’s translating, editing and publishing problems.  It was not until early 1900, however, that Chertkov formally rote to Fifield, inviting him to leave his work in London and join him in the country in order to establish a small publishing business initially devoted entirely to the production of cheap, un-copyrighted editions of translations of Tolstoy, asking ‘It is not a question of whether you will accept, but whether you dare refuse.’”

Fifield had been working for the James Bowden firm, which had just closed down.  His last work there had been the “manufacturing and marketing of penny editions of Charles Sheldon’s religious novels, selling three million copies in six months! Chertkov could hardly have hoped to equal these sales, but the fact that Fifield had first-hand experience of publishing literature of a quasi-religious nature for mass distribution made him a particularly valuable acquisition.  Although well aware of the difficulties of working with Chertkov, Fifield enthusiastically took up the offer, writing in his ‘Statement’:

I was not sorry to change for something much nearer to my heart.  I wanted to be a ‘good Tolstoyan’, to be useful in the world, to take little and give much, and not to compete but to originate.  I was 32 years old, had been married six years, and my wife shared my ideals.”

The Free Age Press was funded not be Chertkov but by Alexander Nikolayevich Konshin.  “According to Fifield, Konshin, who came of a family of wealthy cotton-spinners based in the textile town of Serpukhov, was the sole source of capital first providing an outright gift of £300 and a year later giving a further £200.  It was from these donations that Fifield’s own salary was paid, to begin with £2 10s. 0d. and later, at Konshin’s wish. Once the business was under way, £3 per week…

The FAP did not print ‘in-house’ and required no elaborate equipment.  The office was a back bedroom in Fifield’s home, first at Catford in South East London and later at Wick Cottage in Southbourne, Hampshire.  Thus, although the imprint on the early FAP editions was ‘Maldon, Essex’, physically there was never a Free Age Press at Maldon.    Instead, Fifield maintained regular contact with Chertkov by letter and made frequent visits to Purleigh to consult with him, but when ready to print he engaged outside printers, often the Edinburgh firm of Morrison and Gibb.  “

from Open Plaques
http://openplaques.org/plaques/7941

Tolstoy wrote with his appreciation

“Dear Friends,

I have received the first issues of your books, booklets and leaflets containing my writings, as well as the statements concerning the object and plan of The Free Age Press.

The publications are extremely neat and attractive, and – what to me appears most important – very cheap, and therefore quite accessible to the great public, consisting of the working classes. 

I also warmly sympathize with the announcement on your translations that no rights are reserved.  Being well aware of all the extra sacrifices and practical difficulties that this involves for a publishing concern at the present day, I particularly desire to express my heartfelt gratitude to the translators and participators in your work, who in generous compliance with my objection to copyright of any kind, thus help to render yor English version of my writings absolutely free to all who may wish to make sue of it. 

Should I write anything more which I may think worthy of publication, I will with great pleasure forward it to your without delay.

With heartiest wishes for the further success of your efforts,

Leo Tolstoy."

"…All unused to business by nature and training as he was, even despising its claims on time and attention, and impatient with any new chains of obligations, Tcherkoff yet bowed his neck to my English yoke and subdued himself for three years sufficiently to enable me to issue no less than forty three separate publications of a total length of 2,2024 pages, in the translation of which he took a very large share, with a total circulation of 209,000 copies besides a quarter of a million leaflets.  And multiplying the page length by the circulation attained one can say that The Free Age Press put before the English-speaking world no less than 424 million of pages of Tolstoy’s writings, on a self-supporting basis, with no personal profit; besides permitting very extensive reproduction of the articles and stories in magazines and newspapers.

"The relationship was improbable, and the achievement, even when viewed from a distance of nearly ninety years, truly remarkable.  Yet a doubt still remains.  With only a few exceptions, the FAP concerned itself exclusively with Tolstoy’s political and religious works.  As such it certainly helped focus British attention in the early years of this century on Tolstoy’s unequal struggle against Russian authoritarianism.  It also made a considerable contribution to English-language pacifist and Christian-anarchist writing in the period leading up to the First World War.  It was, however, very much part of a religious and political crusade directed against current Russian conditions, and for this, and the urgency that inevitably accompanies such a crusade, there was a price to pay, especially in terms of continuing relevance and lasting value.  Conditions in Russia changed, first after the 1905 Revolution, then again, far more radically, in 1917.  And although Tolstoy did address himself to problems of a universal relevance, supreme propagandist that he was he considered them in a contemporary context that is only with difficulty accessible to the modern reader.  For this reason, if not other, when the modern reader hears the name Tolstoy, it is to War and Peace and Anna Karenina that his thoughts first turn, and not to FAP editions of The Slavery of Our Times, The Kingdom of God, and I Cannot Be Silent.”

Arthur C. Fifield - Godfrey Blount's friend and publisher

When Godfrey Blount died in July 1937, he divided his estate of £9,904 12s 11d between his nephew Charles Hubert Boulby Blount, MC Air Commodore RAF and Arthur Charles Fifield, a retired publisher.  This seems slightly strange because whilst having no children, Godfrey’s wife Ethel Blount did not die until 1942, I can only assume that by leaving some of his estate to his nephew, Godfrey was in fact providing for Ethel.  Godfrey’s good friends Joseph King and Greville MacDonald did not die until 1943 and 1944 respectively.

Arthur C. Fifield, publisher of Godfrey Blount's Arbor Vitae

So who was Arthur Fifield?  Blount had been publishing works with Arthur Fifield since 1899’s Arbor Vitae, so as a minimum they would have known each other for 45 years.

Fifield was a follower of Tolstoy, and had worked for the Free Age Press.  This was set up in 1900 by Vladimir Chertkov, a wealthy aristocrat from St Petersburg, and perhaps the most prolific follower of Tolstoy, and his most devoted disciple.  "Since the autocracy considered Tolstoyism an enemy, Chertkov left for England in 1896." (Wikipedia) But it also seems that Chertkov created problems in the Tolstoy family, some of which was dramaticized in the 2009 film 'The Last Station', a few clips of which are here on The Guardian's website.

Vladimir Chertkov with Tolstoy
from Wikipedia

"Chertkov had a troubled relationship with most of the Tolstoy family, and tried actively to destroy the relationship between Tolstoy and his wife Sophia. Tolstoy's final flight, for example, is described as having been greatly influenced by Chertkov. Sophia was especially troubled by what she felt was his hypocritical philosophy: he decried wealth, but had his own fancy estate. His associates lay about her house and ate free and paid no rent and criticized her materialism, while she raised several children and ran the entire business side of Tolstoy's writing (at Tolstoy's wish), which provided a major source of income for Yasnaya Polyana and enabled their lifestyle.

"Additionally, Chertkov convinced Tolstoy to sign a secret will and give control of his works to Chertkov instead of Sophia. He then used this control to publish versions of Tolstoy's collected works as he wanted. He also criticized Sophia, discredited her diaries and her own writing, and played up his own relationship with the Count. Chertkov also fostered a positive relationship with the newly formed Soviet state, which he used to suppress Sophia's version of Tolstoy's life story and his relationship with her." (Wikipedia, ibid.)

Chertkov arrived in Croydon in 1897 at the beginning of his eleven-year exile.  He immediately began publishing banned Tolstoyan materials in Russian, and also established the Free Age Press as an outlet for cheap, uncopyrighted English translations of Tolstoy’s newer works, on the model of his Posrednik publishing operation in Russia. 

Free Age Press Tolstoyian publication,
published by Arthur C. Fifield

Early in 1900 he asked Arthur C. Fifield, a Brotherhood Church member with whom he had frequently discussed the publication and distribution of books, to manage the latter.  The Free Age Press at the time has 'Maldon Essex' as it's address, this is 4 miles away from Purleigh, where Chertkov was living in the Purleigh Colony, and Fifield was reported to be living 'just down the road'.  The Free Age Press then consisted of Arthur Fifield and Chertkov, and a few translators such as Aylmer Maude.  Fifield was an ‘assistant translator’, improving the English of Chertkov and other Russians.  He also did all the office work and made arrangements with printers.  ‘I was publisher, manager, joint editor, joint translator, publicity agent, advertising expert, warehouseman, porter, packer, clerk, book-keeper, office boy and stamp licker, all in one,’ Fifield wrote.   

The Free Age Press had two branches “the production of Russian language Tolstoyan materials and secondly the production of Tolstoy’s writing in cheap additions for an international English readership.  These cheap pamphlets had considerable international reach and could be purchased as far afield as Shanghai and New York City.  Tolstoy praised the publications price, presentation and accessibility to ‘English speaking working people; and through Chertkov maintained a ‘special relationship’ with the publishing enterprise.   The Free Age Press was the best known and likely the most profitable Tolstoyan publishing enterprise, arguably due to the numerous members of the Tolstoyan movement who worked for the enterprise.  Notably Arthur Fifield, a member of the Croydon Brotherhood Church, ensured the popularity of the publications in its initial years.  Despite its success, Chertkov’s leadership alienated many of his Tolstoyan coworkers and publishing output diminished.”  (https://tolstoyans.wordpress.com/tolstoyan-enterprises/publishing-enterprises/)

Free Age Press publications, 1900

“…Fifield worked with Free Age for only three years, from early 1900 to the middle of 1902, in that time bringing out forty-three publications.  He left after a dispute with Chertkov (the aristocrat quarrelled with practically all his associates) and soon thereafter started his own publishing house, the Simple Life Press, later using his own name, A.C.Fifield, Publisher.  In this new form he produced many volumes of Tolstoyan themes, including a few by Tolstoy himself.  His books spanned the concerns of the London Tolstoyans: works by and on Tolstoy himself, simplicity in living (the Simple Life Series seems to have been his first set of publications, with over twenty volumes), vegetarianism, protest against exploitation, and affirmations of the hope of human brotherhood….Five of the twenty titles cited by Gandhi in his Hind Swaraj were from Fifield.  There were two essays by Thoreau, ‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience’ and ‘Life Without Principle’ and Godfrey Blount’s A New Crusade, calling for simplicity in lifestyle, the revival of traditional crafts, and the renewing of country life.  The fourth was The Fallacy of Speed by Thomas Taylor, a sweeping critique of modern civilization, questioning the presumed benefits of improved transportation. …Eleven Fifield titles were found in Gandhi’s ashram library, including Sayings of Tolstoy (1911), Crosby’s Tolstoy as a Schoolmaster (1904), and Percy Reffern’s Tolstoy – a Study (1907).  Salome Hocking (Mrs Fifield) was represented by her novel of Tolstoyan communities, Belinda the Backward; A Romance of Modern Idealism (1905).  Three were by the vegetarian Henry D.Salt, including Animals’ Rights (1905).”  ( Hunt, James D., An American Looks at Gandhi: Essays in Satyagraha, Civil Rights, and Peace, Bibliophile, South East Asia, 2005)

"...Charles W. Daniel (1871 – 1955) became the principal organizer of the London Tolstoyan Society, in 1902, he began his own publishing business and also distributed Free Age books, eventually supplanting Fifield as the leading publisher of unorthodox books with a Tolstoyan ambience.” (ibid.)

From reading about Daniel it appears that my modern understanding of the term ‘crank’ (my previous posts The Haslemere Cranks)  and it’s meaning at the time are not in alignment: “In 1904, he stated a monthly, first called The Crank, and later The Open Road.  The first name was suggested by Mary Everest Boole, one of its regular contributors.  ‘A crank’, she said, ‘is a little thing that makes revolutions’. 

Arthur C. Fifield's wife, Salome Hocking,
published by Arthur C. Fifield

Fifield married Salome Hocking.  Alston (Alston, Charlotte, Tolstoy and his Disciples: The History of a Radical International Movement, I.B. Tauris, 2013) refers to her as “sometime manager of the Free Age Press”.   Fifield and Hocking married in 1894.  Hocking’s novel Belinda the Backward: A Romance of Modern Idealism appears to have been heavily influenced by her time at the Free Age Press and is based on working in a publishers printing Russian literature for a Mr Kovelevsky (Chertkov) and other identifiable characters.  Alston states that “Fifield believed that his wife genuinely feared Chertkov, but she insisted that her portrait of him was not malicious.”  The Hockings appear to have been a literary family from Brannel, Cornwall, Salome’s brother Joseph Hocking (1860-1937) was a Methodist minister who used fiction as a means of conveying his Christian beliefs, and her brother Silas K. Hocking is described in a similar fashion.   There is further information on the Hockings in various publications including Pulp Methodism: The Lives and Literature of Silas, Joseph and Salome Hocking, Three Cornish Novelists (Kent, Alan M., Cornish Hillside Publications, 2002).

Fifield met Chertkov through the Brotherhood Church, but what was this?  "The Croydon Brotherhood Church’s charismatic leader, John C. Kenworthy, underwent a Tolstoyan conversion and thereafter preached a blend of Christian Socialism and Tolstoyan anarchism.  (It is still active today, see their website here)  By 1897, several followers had settled on a lot of land in Purleigh, Essex; the agricultural commune underwent fast expansion.  Among the sympathizers who settled locally, Tolstoy’s disciple, the political exile Vladimir Chertkov…Although they donned Norfolk jackets, flannel shorts, and smocks like Ashbee’s men, early Purleigh and Whiteway settlers, rather than pursue silversmithing and cabinetry, worked the land like Tolstoy among his peasantry at Yasnaya Polyana…At the height of its popularity, Purleigh Colony inspired similar experiments outside Blackburn, Sheffield, and Leeds.  But the colonists’ decision to pledge nearly half of Purleigh’s capital to the transport to Canada of a refugee Russian pacificst sect, the Doukhobors,  precipitated the ultimate financial collapse of Purleigh in 1900.  Internal dissension had already spurred a splinter group to break away and found Whiteway Colony in the Cotswolds in 1898…

"The English Tolstoyan life vividly recounted in one novel produced by an ally and associate, Salome Hocking, who, with her spouse, Arthur C. Fifield, had deliberately settled down the road from Purleigh Colony. 

“One hesitates to call the novel a satire, because it does not parody crankish behaviour. …Belinda enumerates her physical discomforts there.  The fire from the insufficient wood stove leaves everything they eat and drink tasting of smoke, and the floor and ceiling beams of the cottage are black with it.  The windows are badly fitted, so she tries to stifle the drafts by placing her comb and brush against the gaps around the window frames.  There is a shortage of linen and space, so she sleeps on a mattress on the floor of the front room with a carriage rug and her coat as additional blankets.  As the cottage is without cupboards or wardrobes, she is promised a few nails on which to hang her dresses.  Most of all, it is the dark bread, baked from the grain that they have grown and harvest, that offends her, it is inedible, hard, saltless, and dry; and it constitutes much of the two-meal-a-day diet at the colony. 

Salome Hocking,
from Salome Hocking: A Cornish Woman Writer, Goodman, Gemma,
Women of Cornwall Monograph Series, The Hypatia Trust, 2004

“What is interesting is that long after she has settled in and experienced a winter in the colony, Belinda reflects on the necessity of crafts as a means of sustaining both happiness and the fabric of the commune.  Most of those who remain at the colony are, like, her, bookish and city-bred.  But she observes that “genuine” country people excel at skills of carpentry and shoe mending and that the winter is when farmers repair gates and doors and harnesses and replace hinges and fastenings.  She argues that the colonist has to be as handy as a sailor and “be able to knock up a shed, make a table and bench, and, if possible, a chair for himself”.  “For a colony to be successful some handicraft should be allied to agriculture”  Notice, however, that while she uses the term handicraft, there is no goal here of selling one’s work or converting others’ tastes to more Aesthetic designs.  In this Tolstoyian environment, one aims for self-sufficiency rather than market success.” (Maltz, Diana, Living by Design: C.R. Ashbee’s Build of Handicraft and Two English Tolstoyan Communities, 1897-1907, Victorian Literature and Culture, Vol. 39, No.2 (2011) pp.409-426)

Sadly, the most famous mention of Arthur C. Fifield is his rejection letter to Gertrude Stein in 1912.  The best explanation of this event (online) states “In 1912, Gerturude Stein sent a manuscript to London-based publisher Arthur C. Fifield.  The modernist author, known for her avant-garde and at times impenetrable prose, had sent what would later be The Making of Americans: Being a History of a Family’s Progress, published in 1925.  The novel is one of Stein’s more challenging works, using present particple, limited vocabulary, and a lot of repitition.  It was this last feature that Fifield drew upon to craft his rejection letter (19 April 1912):

“Dear Madam

I am only one, only one, only one.  Only one being, one at the same time.  Not two, not three, only one.  Only one life to live, only sixty minutes in one hour.  Only one pair of eyes.  Only one brain.  Only one being.  Being only one, having only one pair of eyes, having only one time, having only one life, I cannot read your M.S. three or four times.  Not even one time.  Only one look, only one look is enough.  Hardly one copy would sell here.  Hardly one.  Hardly one.

Many thanks.  I am returning the M.S. by registered post.  Only one M.S. by one post.”  (http://mentalfloss.com/article/65717/read-publishers-rejection-letter-gertrude-stein)

Women's Suffrage in Haslemere 1908 - 1913

With increased interest in this subject for 2018, I thought it was useful to outline what I think are the main facts on the suffrage movement in Haslemere.

In 1908 a NUWSS (National Union of Women's Suffrage Society) society was formed at Haslemere.  The first secretary was Mrs Marshall of Tweenways, Hindhead.  In 1910 Miss Rees of ‘By the Way’, Hindhead took over as secretary.  “For the January 1910 election campaign the society opened a shop at The Gables, Haslemere.” (Crawford, Elizabeth, The Women’s Suffrage Movement in Britain and Ireland: A Regional Survey, Routledge, 15 April 2013).  Mrs G.F. Watts of Compton Pottery was the president of the Guildford NUWSS.

The Haslemere Museum holds a photograph of the NUWSS marching down the High Street, the main banner announcing “NUWSS Non-Militant Portsmouth Road”, behind this might be the banner  made by the St Edmundsbury Weavers announcing “Weaving Fair and Weaving Free, England’s Web of Destiny’ as mentioned in my previous post.

NUWSS march, Haslemere High Street c.1908
reproduced courtesy of Haslemere Educational Museum

The 1911 census shows that Godfrey and Ethel Blount no longer lived at Foundry Cottage, where they were living in 1901, but had moved to St Cross, Weydown Road.  Foundry Cottage, Foundry Lane, in the middle of the Haslemere Peasant Industries, had as the head of the household an Ethel Leeds (aged 46), widow, living on private means.  She is recorded as living their with one of her daughters, Mary Faith Leeds (23) an artist (miniature). 

The signature for the census entry is of interest, as Ethel has a written suffrage protest in the signature: “protest” and “voteless taxpayer”.  Ethel Leeds was the widow of Reverend William Howard Leeds (grandson of Sir George William Leeds, 1^st Baronet).  Her daughter Mary Faith Leeds married Vice-Admiral Sir John Anthony Vere Morse in 1917.

Foundry Cottage, Foundry Lane, Haslemere
1911 census extract

In 1913 it was reported in various newspapers about a bomb in Haslemere:

“A BOMB ON A RAILWAY BRIDGE

At Haslemere Railway Station on Saturday evening a small box containing a clock-work arrangement and gunpowder, with fuse and electric battery, was found on the footbridge.  It has a “Votes for women” label.”(The Yorkshire Post, 21 July 1913)

It has been more recently reported that there was further protest on this bomb in a note addressed to member of the Haslemere Urban District Council “Have we your sympathy?  If not, beware!”.  (Webb, Simon, The Suffrage Bombers, Pen & Sword, 2014) The bomb did not create any damage “a porter at Haslemere Station in Surrey found a box on the stairs leading from one of the platforms.  He had the presence of mind to plunge the box into a pail of water, which was fortunate, because it was, of course, a time bomb.” (ibid.)