Eeldrop and Appleplex

In Short

This brief, episodic work depicts two men, Eeldrop and Appleplex, who rent rooms in a neighborhood known for its silence and illicit undercurrents. They spend their time observing criminals, neighbors, and acquaintances, striving to look past the conventional classifications—like "the unhappily married" or "the criminal"—to find the unique, irreducible spark of individual humanity. The book acts as a philosophical dialogue, questioning whether it is truly possible to understand another person or if we are all merely trapped by our own rationalizations and societal roles.

The Story

The narrative begins with Eeldrop and Appleplex establishing their base of operations in a shady, curtained street across from a police station. They have chosen this location specifically to watch the fallout of local crimes. When a malefactor is arrested, the two men rush out to observe the crowd: Appleplex actively interviews the onlookers to gather inconsistent, messy histories, while Eeldrop remains passive, listening to their vernacular and observing their physical habits. Back in their rooms, Appleplex catalogs these interactions in extensive files, while Eeldrop, a skeptic with theological interests, reflects on the nature of these encounters.

The men share a common goal: to move beyond the "pigeonholed" and "systematized" lives of the respectable world. They discuss a "fat Spaniard" they met earlier, who, despite his vulgar manners and cliched exterior, became an object of genuine interest the moment he revealed a singular, tragic fact about his life. Eeldrop argues that such moments of revelation are the only things that matter, yet they are ignored because they are "useless" and resist categorization. They agree that modern society, having lost the theological framework that once valued the individual soul, now only understands people as members of a class.

The focus then shifts to a specific acquaintance, a woman named Edith, or "Scheherazade." Eeldrop wonders what has become of her, imagining her future as a vain, aging woman living a life of physical comfort and spiritual decline. Appleplex, who possesses files on her various aliases and social movements, critiques Eeldrop’s romantic vision. He argues that the "passion for experience" is a fake creed, a theatrical affectation. They analyze Edith’s chaotic life—from her marriage to a billiard professional to her failed attempts at poetry—and conclude that she is not a tragic figure. Because she is overly rational and constantly "coaching" her own life, she remains impenetrable and, ultimately, uninteresting. She lacks the unconscious, instinctual quality required to be a true artist or a subject of real tragedy.

The story ends on a note of mundane reality. The two men, despite their lofty philosophical ambitions, are constrained by their own lives. Eeldrop, a bank clerk, must return to his garden in the suburbs. Appleplex, though he has just spent the evening critiquing social circles, admits he is dining with a woman named Mrs. Howexden. They agree to continue their discussion about the nature of "Sets and Society" the following night, leaving their grand inquiry hanging in the air.

How It Unfolds

The observation of the mob The men settle into their rooms and establish a ritual of watching the police station. They find that the true drama lies not in the arrest itself, but in the reactions of the onlookers and the "alien visitors" who linger long after the victim is taken away.

The critique of classification The duo identifies the "common motive" behind their experiment: to escape the well-ordered, pigeonholed life. Eeldrop argues that human beings are only seen through the lens of their utility, which obscures the "unique importance of events" and erases the possibility of tragedy.

The dialogue on philosophy Appleplex questions their method, worrying they might be falling into the trap of creating a "platform" for their beliefs. They explicitly reject the labels of "individualist" or "anti-intellectualist," preferring to remain skeptical observers who avoid the self-consciousness of a school of thought.

The suburban interlude The scene shifts to a grey Sunday in the suburbs, grounding Eeldrop’s high-minded theories in the reality of damp gardens and flies. Eeldrop reflects on the mysterious Edith, prompting Appleplex to produce his meticulous, unromantic files on her life.

The analysis of Edith The men dissect Edith’s history, concluding that her chaotic life is actually a byproduct of excessive, cold rationality. They decide she is not an artist because she is not driven by instinct, and not tragic because she is entirely in control of her own "disorder."

The return to routine The narrative concludes with the realization that their inquiry cannot fully separate them from their mundane obligations. Eeldrop prepares for his suburban chores, and Appleplex prepares for a social engagement, highlighting the irony that their philosophical detachment exists alongside their participation in the very society they study.

The People

Eeldrop is the more abstract of the two, acting as a skeptic with a deep interest in theology. He is driven by a desire to encounter the "concrete individuality" of the human soul. He stands in the way of his own goal through his elitist tendency to view others—like Edith—as mere material for his observations. By the end, he remains a bank clerk, trapped by the very domesticity he claims to escape.

Appleplex serves as the empirical partner, a materialist who leans toward skepticism and possesses a scientific temperament. He wants to document the world through his "Survey of Contemporary Society," using notebooks to organize human experience from A to Y. He is more grounded than Eeldrop, yet his obsession with cataloging often distances him from the very "vital truths" he seeks. He ends up just as caught in social conventions as his subjects, planning a dinner engagement despite his cynicism toward the "sets" he studies.

Edith (Scheherazade) is the subject of their intense, cold scrutiny. A daughter of a piano tuner who has reinvented herself across multiple continents and social circles, she is the mystery they cannot solve. To the men, she is a failure because she is too self-aware and rational. She stands in the way of their desire for a "tragic" subject because she refuses to be anything other than a collection of her own calculated choices.

In Its Own Voice

"There are evil neighborhoods of noise and evil neighborhoods of silence, and Eeldrop and Appleplex preferred the latter, as being the more evil."

The men choose their living situation with deliberate care to better facilitate their study of humanity’s darker, hidden corners.

"Many are not quite real at any moment."

Eeldrop laments how most people exist only as cogs in a social machine, acting out the roles of government officials or trade unionists rather than living as individuals.

"The essential is unique. Perhaps that is why it is so neglected: because it is useless."

Eeldrop explains why the most important, singular moments of a person's life are ignored by a society that only values what can be applied to a general case.

What It's Really About

The central argument concerns the loss of the individual in a world obsessed with systems. The characters are preoccupied with the idea that modern life, with its focus on sociology, reform, and "classification," has stripped the human experience of its tragic weight. They contend that we have traded "actual coinage" for "paper currency"—meaning we use empty, generalized labels instead of perceiving the raw, often uncomfortable reality of a person’s soul. The book questions whether a person can ever truly be known, or if the act of analyzing another person inevitably turns them into a specimen, thereby destroying the very uniqueness one hopes to discover.

Why Read It Today

This work is a fascinating, if slight, precursor to the themes of alienation and social critique that would define the author’s more famous poetry. You will enjoy this if you appreciate intellectual games and the kind of sharp, detached prose that looks at the world with a mixture of curiosity and deep-seated world-weariness. It captures a specific, early 20th-century urban atmosphere where the city is a laboratory and the neighbors are puzzles to be solved.

Be aware, however, that the narrative is deliberately fragmented and argumentative; it offers no traditional plot resolution, as it is primarily a vehicle for ideas. Readers may find the dialogue dense and the perspectives of the two protagonists occasionally cold or condescending, reflecting the period's specific brand of intellectual elitism. The text is brief, yet it demands a slow reading to parse the irony. What stays with you is the haunting question of how we categorize our friends and ourselves, and the uncomfortable realization that the "logical" versions of our lives often obscure the messy, unclassifiable reality of who we actually are. It is a sharp, atmospheric exercise in looking past the surface of the respectable world.