By Evans, Julian
New Statesman (1996) , Vol. 132, No. 4628
Throughout February, Quentin Skinner, regius professor of modern history at Cambridge, delivered the Ford's Lectures in British History under the title of "Freedom Representation and Revolution, 1603-51". In the 17th century, according to Skinner, a particular view of freedom gained ground in England. Our liberty, to be true liberty, must be based on more than our ability to exercise our rights and liberties without interference from a discretionary power. (That, according to Skinner, is merely negative liberty.) It must rather be based on our having the status or standing of independent persons, not subject to another's will.
This not so innocent distinction helped cause the English civil war of 1642-51, and the new view of liberty legitimised the setting up of the English Republic. It was despatched in the counter-revolution; the version of freedom we have inherited is that negative, counterrevolutionary one, enshrined in Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan (1651). Our Leviathan is the monarch, to whom we are still beholden for our rights and liberties. This quite unjustifiable state of affairs becomes a lot less remote in applied terms: under her representative Tony Blair, according to the mildly spoken Skinner, our executive is not nearly responsible enough to the legislative. It is, in effect, an elected dictatorship.
When the feeling persists in a democracy, as it does in ours, that we are not truly free, a revival of the view of those 17th-century critics of the crown is overdue, though we should perhaps be careful how we understand our loss of freedom. We inhabit a democracy, yet our expectations have nearly ceased to be of a democratic kind. They are more to do with economic mobility.
The novel has been predicated on its involvement with individual, often political, freedom ever since it lost its religious sense, roughly a century ago. Here one tends to think of Sartre and Camus, and their conspicuously impractical agenda. In fact, by the 1930s, British novelists were way ahead of European existentialists. Freedom has seldom been more coherently and excitingly explored than in the British thrillers of that decade. Graham Greene's It's a Battlefield (1934) and England Made Me(1935) are key works; so are the pre-war novels of Eric Ambler, Uncommon Danger(1937), The Mask of Dimitrios (1939) and Journey into Fear (1940).
The Thirties thriller, with its protagonist cut loose from society, operated a readily understandable code that placed him in a rapidly mutating equation of good and evil.
The ordinary heroes of Ambler's fiction -- stringers, writers on holiday, language teachers, stateless persons, all ensnared accidentally and resentfully in a world of menace -- are psychologically convincing. …