
“For the artist,” said Mr. Freundlich, “the problem of immortality comes second only after the problem of staying alive. Of all people, the artist is the one most horrified at the thought of a catastrophe which would end everything, including music, poetry, ceramics, art, and making mobiles out of chicken wire and bits of string.”
Robert Nathan published his novel, The Train in the Meadow, in 1953. I have to wonder if he ever read C. S. Lewis’s The Great Divorce, which came out in 1945. Because there are few novels as similar as those two, though they have very different conceptual foundations.
In a meadow in a high mountain pass, a railroad train rolls to a stop. After a while, another train, headed in the opposite direction, pulls up next to it. As they wait for something to happen, the two groups of passengers are supposed to stay apart, but there are some interactions.
The passengers in the first train are a mixed lot. There’s an old Jewish couple, one of them a famous art critic. They’re rather dejected to have been summoned in the middle of the night and expelled from their home for the second time in their lives. There’s a salesman, and also a waitress with whom he once had a one-night stand. There’s a Catholic priest, and a former president of the United States. A hard-working, embittered woman who was abandoned by her daughters. And a little orphan boy, worried because he doesn’t have any “papers” to present at the border. Before long we suspect – and then we know – that these people are all dead, on their way to the next world.
After a time a table is set up in the meadow, and two officials take their stations there. This spot is, apparently, the border. A long line forms, and each person presents his or her papers and gives an account of his or her life. (Though each of them is worried about not being allowed to enter, it doesn’t appear that there’s anywhere else to go.)
It should be no surprise that The Train in the Meadow handles such matters differently than The Great Divorce. Author Nathan did not subscribe to Christian doctrine, as far as I know. His concept of eternity seems to be based on mercy, which is pleasant to read (sometimes heartbreaking, too). His Catholic priest seems to me a pretty poor Catholic, as his hopes for eternity seem to rest on the authority of his office, rather than the grace of God.
The Train in the Meadow is a charming book, and comforting. Theologically, that’s not a great thing, but it was enjoyable and moving to read.






