AMERICAN NIGHTS ENTERTAINMENT
WHEN WINTER COMES TO
MAIN STREET
THE WOMEN WHO MAKE
OUR NOVELS
Fiction
ISLAND OF THE INNOCENT
THE ANSWERER
WORLD WITHOUT END
THE THOUSAND-AND-FIRST
NIGHT (In Preparation)
American Nights
Entertainment
BY
GRANT OVERTON
New York, 1923
D. APPLETON & CO. GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & CO. CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
COPYRIGHT, 1923,
BY GRANT OVERTON
First Printing, September, 1923.
Press of
J. J. Little & Ives Company
New York, U. S. A.
Bound in Interlaken-Cloth
This Book
IS DEDICATED TO BOOKSELLERS
AND BOOKREADERS EVERYWHERE
BY THE AUTHOR AND THE PUBLISHERS
WHO HAVE JOINED IN ITS PRODUCTION
Preface
THIS book is written because of the rapid
spread of the habit of reading books, developing
in its march an interest in the personalities of
authors. Indeed, the existence of this book is an evidence
of the quick contagion of the book-reading
habit, since four publishing houses have joined to
make possible the pages that follow.
Few developments of the early part of this century
are more encouraging than the new attention to
books. The increase in book stores, the very large
increase in the number of books sold, the multiplication
of libraries and their great patronage, the
success of new book review pages and periodicals—all
are signs of the change that has come about in
recent years, and perhaps especially during and since
the war of 1914-18.
And in a narrower department, no development of
recent years has borne a more cheerful promise than
the resolution of four publishers to associate themselves
in an enterprise the disinterestedness of which
the reader is invited to assess for himself.
The entire responsibility for the estimates and
opinions offered (where they are not directly attributed)
is mine. I have tried to tell the truth,
use my imagination legitimately, and observe good
taste without the sacrifice of valuable insights into
character and work.
For example, in addition to biographical facts,
in themselves often unenlightening, I have usually
tried, as in the account of Mr. Galsworthy, to disclose
the personality so carefully (albeit high-mindedly)
withheld from the writer’s books. Again,
as in the chapter on Joseph Conrad, aside from the
effort at novelty and freshness of interest by the device
of adopting Conrad’s own Marlow as the narrator,
I have made bold to set down some facts never
before printed and not in the least generally known,
because they seem to me a side of the picture that it
is wrong to obscure.
The wealth of material spread before me has made
the task of selection exceedingly difficult, and I cannot
pretend to be satisfied with what I have chosen
in the light of my knowledge of what has had to be
left out. I owe a grateful acknowledgment to the
publishers and to individuals in the several publishing
houses for their generous assistance.
IN the autumn of 1922 New York began to witness
a play by John Galsworthy, called Loyalties.
Not only the extreme smoothness of the acting
by a London company but the almost unblemished
perfection of the play as drama excited much praise.
Because, of the two principals, one was a Jew and
the other was not, with consequent enhancement
of the dramatic values in several scenes, it was said
(by those who always seek an extrinsic explanation)
that Loyalties simply could not have avoided being
a success in New York. The same type of mind has
long been busy with the problem of Mr. Galsworthy
as a novelist. It read The Man of Property and
found the book explained by the fact that the author
was a Socialist. Confronted with The Dark Flower,
it declared this “love life of a man” sheer sentimentalism
(in 1913 there was no Freudianism to
fall back on). And the powerful play called Justice
was accounted for by a story that quiet Mr. Galsworthy
had “put on old clothes, wrapped a brick in
brown paper, stopped in front of a tempting-looking
plate-glass window” and let ’er fly. On being
“promptly arrested,” he “gave an assumed name,
and the magistrate, in his turn, gave Galsworthy
six months. That’s how he found out what the
inside of English prisons was like.”
A saying has it that it is always the innocent
bystander who gets hurt; but the fate of the sympathetic
bystander—and such a one John Galsworthy
has always been—is more ironic. That peculiar
sprite, George Meredith’s Comic Spirit, reading all
that has been written about Galsworthy would possibly
find some adequate comment; but Meredith
is dead and the only penetrating characterisation
that occurs to me is: “Galsworthy’s the kind of
man who, if he were in some other station of life,
would be a splendid subject for Joseph Conrad.”
In the middle of Loyalties a character exclaims:
“Prejudices—or are they loyalties—I don’t know—criss-cross—we
all cut each other’s throats from the
best of motives.” Well, in a paper written in 1917
or earlier and included in their book, Some Modern
Novelists, published in January, 1918, Helen
Thomas Follett and Wilson Follett, discussing
Galsworthy’s early novels put down a now very
remarkable sentence, as follows:
“Mr. Galsworthy does not see how two loyalties
that conflict can both be right; and he is always
interested in the larger loyalty.”
So interesting and significant a statement, buried
as seed, might easily sprout as novel or play. I have
no atom of evidence that Mr. Galsworthy ever saw
the comment; but if he read it and forgot (buried?)
the words, then Loyalties was written in their
effectual disproof. For in this drama, as in all his
novels, as in all his other dramas, Mr. Galsworthy
is constantly seeing and portraying how conflicting
loyalties both are right; he is never interested in the
larger loyalty and cannot keep his eye on it through
consecutive chapters or through a single act; he is
forever presenting the two or more sides and taking
none. He once said: “I suppose the hardest lesson
we all have to learn in life is that we can’t have
things both ways.” He should have added:“—and
I have never learned it!”
ii
“Learned,” of course, in the sense of “accepted,”
of becoming reconciled to the fact. It did not need
Mr. St. John Ervine to tell us that “Mr. Galsworthy
is the most sensitive figure in the ranks of
modern letters”; for of all modern writers the
author of Loyalties and The Forsyte Saga is the
most transparent. He is transparent without being
in the smallest degree luminous; he refracts, but
he does not magnify—a prism through which we
may look at society.
Compare him for a moment with Mr. Conrad.
Mr. Conrad is by no means always transparent; his
opacity is sometimes extraordinary, as in The Rescue;
and yet from the midst of obscure sentences,
like a gleam from those remarkably deep-set eyes,
something luminous will shine out, both light and
heat are given forth. “In a certain cool paper,”
explains Galsworthy, “I have tried to come at the
effect of the war; but purposely pitched it in a low
and sober key; and there is a much more poignant
tale of change to tell of each individual human
being.” But even when telling the more poignant
tale, as in Saint’s Progress, the coolness is noticeable,
like the air of an April night; the key is still
sober, pitched low; and the trembling passion of a
melody proclaimed by violins is quickly muted.
Such is his habitual restraint, so strong is his inhibition,
that when we hear the orchestral brasses, as
we do once or twice in Justice and Loyalties, it
shocks us, like a rowdy outburst in a refined assembly
or a terse sentence in Henry James. But it is
nothing, nothing. Mr. Galsworthy has momentarily
achieved a more perfect than usual transparency;
he has suddenly surrendered to the pounce of another
of those multitudinous loyalties which give
him no peace and the secret of which, except for
its continual disclosure in his works, he would most
certainly carry with him to the grave.
For he does not talk. No! “You are nearer
Galsworthy in reading his books than in a meeting.”
Another keenly observant person summed up Galsworthy’s
conversational resources in the one word:
“Exhausted!” St. John Ervine: “Whatever of
joy and grief he has had in life has been closely
retained, and the reticence characteristic of the English
people ... is most clearly to be observed in
Mr. Galsworthy.... How often have we observed
in our relationships that some garrulous person, constantly
engaged in egotistical conversation, contrives
to conceal knowledge of himself from us, while some
silent friend, with lips tightly closed, most amazingly
gives himself away. One looks at Mr. Galsworthy’s
handsome, sensitive face, and is immediately
aware of tightened lips!... But the lips
are not tightened because of things done to him, but
because of things done to others.” Mr. Galsworthy,
in a personal letter: “The fact is I cannot answer
your questions. I must leave my philosophy to my
work generally, or rather, to what people can make
out of that work. The habit of trying to tabloid
one’s convictions, or lack of convictions, is a pretty
fatal one; as I have found to my distaste and discredit.”
He conducts his own cross-examination,
in new books, new plays. He acknowledges, with
quiet discontent, the claims upon his sense of loyalty
of a dog, a jailbird, two “star-crossed lovers,” the
wife of a possessive Forsyte, a De Levis unjustly
used. His pen moves, with a bold stroke, across the
paper; another secret is let out; his lips tighten.
He is serene and indignant and completely happy.
Why not? “My experience tells me this: An
artist who is by accident of independent means can,
if he has talent, give the Public what he, the artist,
wants, and sooner or later the public will take
whatever he gives it, at his own valuation.” And
he speaks of such artists as able to “sit on the Public’s
head and pull the Public’s beard, to use the old
Sikh saying.” Nothing else is worth while—for an
artist. “The artist has got to make a stand against
being exploited.” But if the artist should exploit
himself, or anything more human or individual than
that impersonal entity, the Public, Mr. Galsworthy’s
mouth would become grim again; his loyalty
would be forfeited, I think. There might be
a larger cause, but his concern would be with the
other fellow. And however hard you might press
him for a verdict, he would bring in only a recommendation
for mercy.
iii
The Galsworthys have been in Devonshire as far
back as records go—“since the flood—of Saxons, at
all events,” as John Galsworthy once put it. His
mother came of a family named Bartleet, whose
county for many centuries was Worcestershire. The
boy, John, was born in 1867 at Coombe, in Surrey.
“From the first,” continues the anonymous but
authorised sketch I am quoting, “his salient characteristics
were earnestness and tenacity. Not surprisingly
brilliant, he was sure and steady; his
understanding, not notably quick, was notably
sound. At Harrow from 1881-1886 he did well in
work and games. At New College, Oxford, 1886-1889,
he graduated with an Honour degree in Law.
After some further preparation he was called to the
bar (Lincoln’s Inn) in 1890. It was natural he
should have taken up the law, since his father had
done so. ‘I read,’ he says, ‘in various chambers,
practised almost not at all, and disliked my profession
thoroughly.’
“In these circumstances he began to travel. His
father, a successful and unusual man in both character
and intellect, was ‘not in a position to require
his son to make money’; his son, therefore, travelled,
off and on, for nearly two years, going, amongst
other places, to Russia, Canada, British Columbia,
Australia, New Zealand, the Fiji Islands, and South
Africa. On a sailing-ship voyage between Adelaide
and the Cape he met and became a fast friend with
the novelist Joseph Conrad, then still a sailor. We
do not know whether this friendship influenced
Galsworthy in becoming a writer; indeed, we believe
that he has somewhere said that it did not. But
Galsworthy did take to writing, published his first
novel, Jocelyn, in 1899, Villa Rubein in 1900,
A Man of Devon and Other Stories in 1901.”
Jocelyn has been dropped from the list of Galsworthy’s
works, Villa Rubein was revised in 1909,
The Island Pharisees, a satire of English weaknesses
which appeared in 1904, was revised four years
later; and it was not until the publication of The
Man of Property in 1906 that our author succeeded
in sitting on the Public’s head and twining his fingers
firmly into the Public’s whiskers.
This was the first volume of the then-unplanned
Forsyte Saga and it led Conrad, who had two years
previously dedicated to Galsworthy what remains
his greatest novel (Nostromo), to write an article
in which he said:
“The foundation of Mr. Galsworthy’s talent, it
seems to me, lies in a remarkable power of ironic
insight combined with an extremely keen and faithful
eye for all the phenomena on the surface of the
life he observes. These are the purveyors of his
imagination, whose servant is a style clear, direct,
sane, illumined by a perfectly unaffected sincerity.
It is the style of a man whose sympathy with mankind
is too genuine to allow him the smallest gratification
of his vanity at the cost of his fellow-creatures
... sufficiently pointed to carry deep his
remorseless irony and grave enough to be the dignified
vehicle of his profound compassion. Its sustained
harmony is never interrupted by those bursts
of cymbals and fifes which some deaf people acclaim
for brilliance. Before all it is a style well under
control, and therefore it never betrays this tender
and ironic writer into an odious cynicism of laughter
and tears.
“From laboriously collected information, I am
led to believe that most people read novels for
amusement. This is as it should be. But whatever
be their motives, I entertain towards all novel-readers
the feelings of warm and respectful affection.
I would not try to deceive them for worlds.
Never! This being understood, I go on to declare,
in the peace of my heart and the serenity of my conscience,
that if they want amusement they shall find
it between the covers of this book. They shall find
plenty of it in this episode in the history of the
Forsytes, where the reconciliation of a father and
son, the dramatic and poignant comedy of Soames
Forsyte’s marital relations, and the tragedy of
Bosinney’s failure are exposed to our gaze with the
remorseless yet sympathetic irony of Mr. Galsworthy’s
art, in the light of the unquenchable fire
burning on the altar of property. They shall find
amusement, and perhaps also something more lasting—if
they care for it. I say this with all the
reserves and qualifications which strict truth requires
around every statement of opinion. Mr. Galsworthy
will never be found futile by anyone, and
never uninteresting by the most exacting.”
Twelve years after the appearance of The Man
of Property, in the volume Five Tales (1918), was
included a long short story, Indian Summer of a
Forsyte. The year 1920 saw publication of the
novel, In Chancery, and another long short story,
Awakening; and the following year brought the
novel, To Let. These five units, separately in the
order named or together in the same chronological
order in the thick volume called The Forsyte Saga,
compose a record of three generations of an English
family which has very justly been compared to the
Esmonds of Thackeray. The Forsytes and their
associates and connections are indeed “intensely
real as individuals—real in the way that the Esmonds
were real; symbolic in their traits, of a section
of English society, and reflecting in their lives
the changing moods of England in these years.”
The motif is clearly expressed by certain words of
young Jolyon Forsyte in The Man of Property:
“‘A Forsyte is not an uncommon animal. There
are hundreds among the members of this club.
Hundreds out there in the streets; you meet them
wherever you go!... We are, of course, all of
us slaves of property, and I admit that it’s a question
of degree, but what I call a “Forsyte” is a man
who is decidedly more than less a slave of property.
He knows a good thing, he knows a safe thing, and
his grip on property—it doesn’t matter whether it
be wives, houses, money, or reputation—is his hallmark....
“Property and quality of a Forsyte.
This little animal, disturbed by the ridicule of his
own sort, is unaffected in his motions by the laughter
of strange creatures (you or I). Hereditarily disposed
to myopia, he recognises only the persons and
habitats of his own species, amongst which he passes
an existence of competitive tranquillity”....
They are half England, and the better half, too,
the safe half, the three-per-cent half, the half that
counts. It’s their wealth and security that makes
everything possible; makes your art possible, makes
literature, science, even religion, possible. Without
Forsytes, who believe in none of these things, but
turn them all to use, where should we be?’”
One of Galsworthy’s severest critics, St. John
Ervine, calls The Forsyte Saga “his best work,”
and breaks the force of many strictures to declare:
“The craftsmanship of To Let is superb—this novel
is, perhaps, the most technically-correct book of our
time—but its human value is even greater than its
craftsmanship. In a very vivid fashion, Mr. Galsworthy
shows the passing of a tradition and an age.
He leaves Soames Forsyte in lonely age, but he does
not leave him entirely without sympathy; for this
muddleheaded man, unable to win or to keep affection
on any but commercial terms, contrives in the
end to win the pity and almost the love of the reader
who has followed his varying fortunes through their
stupid career. The frustrate love of Fleur and Jon
is certainly one of the tenderest things in modern
fiction.”
iv
Grove Lodge, The Grove, Hampstead, London,
N. W. 3, is the residence of Mr. and Mrs. Galsworthy;
if you have occasion to telephone, call
Hampstead 3684. The approach to the house is
described by Carlton Miles in the Theatre Magazine
(December, 1922):
“The Galsworthys live at the bottom of a long,
rambling lane called The Grove, in that part of
Hampstead that looks calmly down on the crowded
chimneypots of northwestern London. To reach
the house you must climb a steep hill from the underground
station and pass the stone building in
which Du Maurier wrote Peter Ibbetson and to
whose memory it bears a tablet. A few minutes’
walk in one direction and you are in Church Row
with the historic cemetery in which Du Maurier
and Beerbohm Tree rest side by side. Follow the
Grove walk and you arrive on Hampstead Heath,
black with thousands of workers on Bank Holiday,
overlooking the little row of cottages where Leigh
Hunt and his followers established their ‘Vale of
Health.’ But, having passed the Du Maurier home,
you turn fairly to your left, descend a winding
pathway that takes you by the Admiral’s House—designated
by large signs—erected 159 years ago by
an aged commander who built his home in three
decks and mounted it with guns. The guns have
vanished but the Admiral’s House still is one of the
sights of Hampstead.
“At the end of the lane a small grilled iron gate
shuts off the world from a green yard and a low
white house, whose rambling line suggests many
passageways and sets of rooms. A sheltered, secluded
spot, the place above all others where Galsworthy
should live. Peace has been achieved in five
minutes’ walk from the noisy station. ‘The Inn of
Tranquillity.’
“A turn down a long hallway, up a short flight of
steps—a bright, flower-decked livingroom, a tea
table, a dark-eyed, low-voiced hostess, a clasping of
hand by host and a bark you interpret as cautious
approval from Mark, the sheepdog, lying on the
hearth rug. Mark is named for one of Galsworthy’s
characters”—Mark Lennan in The Dark Flower?— “... moments
flee before you dare steal a look
at the middle-aged gentleman sitting quietly in his
chair, striving with gentle dignity to place you at
the ease he feels not himself.
“Tall, grey-haired he looks astonishingly like his
photographs. Reticent to a degree about his own
work, he talks freely and with the utmost generosity
about that of others. Opinion, formed slowly, is
determined. The face, with its faint smile, looks
neither disheartened nor sad, yet sometime it has
met suffering. Like most Englishmen the eagerness
of youth has not been crushed.... There is nothing
chill about the novelist. He is the embodiment
of easy, gracious courtesy. Conversation is far
from intimidating, a long flow of material topics
with now and then an upward leap of thought.
And it is this swift flight that betrays his mental
withdrawal. As clearly as if physically present
may be seen the robed figure of his thoughts, standing
behind him in his own drawingroom. You wonder
what may be their burden. About him is the
veil of remoteness.”
His humility, adorned by his presence and made
disarming by what is certainly the most beautiful
head and face among the living sons of men, does
not always save him from the charge of coldness
when manifested impersonally and at a distance.
Where nearly all men and women give essential
particulars of their lives, not to mention the human
touch of their preferred recreations, Mr. Galsworthy,
in the English Who’s Who, besides the long
list of his publications, states only the year of his
birth, his residence, and his membership in the
Athenæum Club. This would hardly support Mr.
Ervine’s declaration that the Galsworthy sensitiveness
“is almost totally impersonal”; and instead of
being “startled to discover how destitute of egotism
Mr. Galsworthy seems to be” the close student of
mankind might be led to speculate upon the variety
of egotism he had just encountered. “It may even
be argued,” pursues Mr. Ervine, cautiously, “that
his lack of interest in himself is a sign of inadequate
artistry, that it is impossible for a man of supreme
quality to be so utterly unconcerned about himself
as Mr. Galsworthy is.” With due respect to Mr.
Ervine, this is nonsense. Whatever Mr. Galsworthy
may lack, it is not interest in himself. He has
achieved countless satisfactory channels for the extrusion
of that interest through other and imaginary
men, women and beasts—that is all.
v
It is as if he had long ago said to himself, as perhaps
he did: “I am myself, but myself isn’t a
subject I can decently be concerned about or expose
an interest in. Let me forget myself in someone—in
everyone—else!” And since then, if he has ever
repented, the spectacle of George Bernard Shaw,
and particularly the horridly fascinating spectacle
of Herbert George Wells, have been before him, to
serve as awful warnings and lasting deterrents. Mr.
Wells, in ever-new contortions, like a circus acrobat
whose nakedness was gaudily accentuated by spangles,
began seeing it through with Ann Veronica
and is still exposing the secret places of his heart,
while dizzy recollections of marriage, God and tono-bungay
yet linger. Mr. Shaw has gone back to
... evolution.
“I was,” Mr. Galsworthy has said in an uninhibited
moment, “for many years devoted to the
sports of shooting and racing. I gave up shooting
because it got on my nerves. I still ride; and I
would go to a race-meeting any day if it were not
for the din, for I am still under the impression that
there is nothing alive quite so beautiful as a thoroughbred
horse.” His devotion to dogs and other
dumb animals is frequently spoken of as it extrudes
in Memories, Noel’s protection of the rabbit in
Saint’s Progress and “For Love of Beasts” in
A Sheaf. These shifting loyalties were—what were
they if not admirable realisations of the Self? But
let those who still believe Mr. Galsworthy selfless
but read the prefaces to the new and very handsome
Manaton Edition of his works. For these volumes
he has provided sixteen entirely new prefaces. I
quote from the announcement of the edition:
“These”—prefaces—“are peculiarly interesting,
for in them he frankly criticises his work; in
some cases, too, they reflect the response of readers
as he has sensed it. In others he tells of the thought
in his mind while writing, and of the changes
through which the thought has gone in the process.
Again, he speculates on the art of writing in general,
on the forms of fiction, on emotional expression and
effect in the drama. In short, as he phrases it, ‘in
writing a preface, one goes into the confessional.’
“Of The Country House he says: ‘When once
Pendyce had taken the bit between his teeth, the
book ran away with me, and was more swiftly finished
than any of my novels, being written in seven
months.’
“‘The germ of The Patrician,’ he begins the
preface to that volume, ‘is traceable to a certain
dinner party at the House of Commons in 1908 and
the face of a young politician on the other side of
the table.’
“In the preface to Fraternity he says: ‘A novelist,
however observant of type and sensitive to the
shades of character, does little but describe and dissect
himself.... In dissecting Hilary, for instance,
in this novel, his creator feels the knife going
sharply into his own flesh, just as he could feel
it when dissecting Soames Forsyte or Horace
Pendyce.’”
The italics are my own and I think they are
permissible.
Probably not enough attention has hitherto been
paid to Mr. Galsworthy as a writer of short tales,
but that may be because no collection of his stories
has shown his talent so roundly as does the new
book Captures. This opens with the well-known
story “A Feud” and offers also such variety and
such virtuosity in the short story form as “The
Man Who Kept His Form,” “A Hedonist,” “Timber,”
“Santa Lucia,” “Blackmail,” “Stroke of
Lightning,” “The Broken Boot,” “Virtue,” “Conscience,”
“Salta Pro Nobis,” “Heat,” “Philanthropy,”
“A Long Ago Affair,” “Acmé,” “Late—299.”
In this book, as in similar collections, there
must be put to Mr. Galsworthy’s credit his frequent
practice of the Continental notion of the short story—the
sketch, the impression, the representation of
a mood which we find in French and Russian literature
and which the American short story too often
sacrifices for purely mechanical effects.
Books by John Galsworthy
1900 Villa Rubein. Revised Edition, 1909
1904 The Island Pharisees. Revised Edition, 1908
1906 The Man of Property
1907 The Country House
1908 A Commentary
1909 Fraternity
1909 Strife. Drama in Three Acts
1909 The Silver Box. Comedy in Three Acts
1909 Joy. Play on the Letter “I” in Three Acts
1909 Plays. First Series. Containing The Silver Box, Joy, and Strife.
1910 Justice. Tragedy in Four Acts
1910 A Motley
1911 The Little Dream. Allegory in six Scenes
1911 The Patrician
1912 The Inn of Tranquillity. Studies and Essays
1912 Moods, Songs, and Doggerels
1912 Memories. Illustrated by Maud Earl
1912 The Eldest Son. Domestic Drama in Three Acts
1912 The Pigeon. Fantasy in Three Acts
1913 Plays. Second Series. Containing The Eldest Son, The Little Dream, Justice
1913 The Dark Flower
1913 The Fugitive. Play in Four Acts
1914 The Mob. Play in Four Acts
1914 Plays. Third Series. Containing The Fugitive, The Pigeon, The Mob
1915 The Little Man and Other Satires
1915 A Bit o’ Love. Play in Three Acts
1915 The Freelands
1916 A Sheaf
1917 Beyond
1918 Five Tales
1919 Another Sheaf
1919 Saint’s Progress
1919 Addresses in America 1919
1920 Tatterdemalion
1920 In Chancery
1920 Awakening
1920 The Skin Game. A Tragi-comedy
1920 The Foundations. An Extravagant Play
1920 Plays. Fourth Series. Containing A Bit o’ Love, The Foundations, The Skin Game
1921 To Let
1921 Six Short Plays. Containing The First and the Last, The Little Man, Hall-marked, Defeat, The Sun, and Punch and Go
1922 The Forsyte Saga
1922 A Family Man
1922 Loyalties
1923 Windows. Comedy in Three Acts
1923 Plays. Fifth Series. Containing Loyalties, Windows, A Family Man
1923 The Burning Spear [first published anonymously in England in 1918]
1923 Captures
Sources on John Galsworthy
John Galsworthy: A Sketch of His Life and Works.
Booklet published by Mr. Galsworthy’s publishers,
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS, 1922.
John Galsworthy. Booklet published by Mr. Galsworthy’s
English publisher, WILLIAM HEINEMANN,
1922. Valuable for its bibliography of
the English editions.
J. G. Pamphlet announcing the Manaton Edition
of John Galsworthy’s works. Procurable from
CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS. This edition contains
some hitherto unpublished material and a rearrangement
of the plays.
The Prefaces to the Manaton Edition. Practically
the only discussion of his own work by the author.
Some Modern Novelists. Helen Thomas Follett
and Wilson Follett. HENRY HOLT & CO.
Chapter X. contains a long and careful critical
consideration of Galsworthy’s work up to and
including The Freelands.
Some Impressions of My Elders. St. John G.
Ervine. THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. For a
forceful statement from one of those who strongly
criticise Mr. Galsworthy’s work, especially for its
“indiscriminating pity.” Analyses at length the
play, The Fugitive.
John Galsworthy. Carlton Miles, THE THEATRE
MAGAZINE, December, 1922. An interview.
A Middle-Class Family. Joseph Conrad. THE
OUTLOOK (London), March 31, 1906. A review
of The Man of Property.
The interested reader should further consult the
READER’S GUIDE TO PERIODICAL LITERATURE for
the years since 1906.
A complete Galsworthy bibliography, to be published
in England, is now in preparation by
Harold A. Marrot.
2. The Magic Carpet
i
THE Magic Carpet was one which took you far
away, whisked you up and through the air
(though not sensibly too fast) and brought you into
a foreign but delightful country. There are books
like that, taking you out of yourself, so that the
preoccupation of a moment before is forgotten, tomorrow’s
worries are lost, and you exist in a blissful
unconsciousness that there can be anything beyond
the fine pleasure of this present hour. The “travel
book” attempts directly the transfer to some place
else; the book of essays, more indirect in its method,
is often more successful.
Aldous Huxley has been known to us hitherto as
a poet and a writer of fiction. Both his poetry and
his fiction have been marked with a graceful artifice
and that simplicity which comes only from a completed
sophistication. His new book, a collection
of essays, is distinguished by those qualities. There
is something about Huxley’s writing—I don’t know
what it is and those who know what it is, can’t tell—which
brings a gleam to the eyes of all who love
literature for its own sake. In On the Margin
Huxley the satirist walks comfortably with Huxley
the student. For Aldous Huxley is a very studious
young man. Tall, with hair that bushes out from
under his broad-brimmed soft hat, he walks with
that slight stoop inevitably acquired by those whose
heads do not pass readily under all doorways. With
his clothes flapping gently around him, his glance
peering through thick-lensed spectacles, he advances
into a room with the surprising effect of an amiable
scarecrow. A first grotesque impression is rapidly
dissolved in the gentle acquaintance springing up
immediately afterward; for no more likeable person
lives. It is not generally known that between the
ages of seventeen and nineteen it was thought he
would go blind, so that he learned to read Braille
type. His interest in America is keen; he would
like to come here, and may. Intimates know him
as one of the most learned men in England, though
devoid of poses and devoted to finding pleasure in
the works of Charles Dickens. His scholarliness
shows itself in On the Margin, where Chaucer, Ben
Jonson, and the devilish biographer, Mr. Strachey,
divide attention with the question of love as practised
in France and England, the justice of Margot
Asquith’s strictures on modern feminine beauty, and
the evolution of ennui.
Recently there died in his ninety-second year
Frederic Harrison, who had witnessed the coronation
of Victoria in 1838 and every celebration in
her reign; who saw her funeral in 1901; who,
though past eighty when it began, saw the war of
1914-1918 and the several years of turmoil afterward.
An extraordinary life! Before it had ended
this man whose span of years was matched by his
breadth of knowledge and interests gathered together
what he himself regarded as his last book,
now published under the title De Senectute and
blending some of his finest literary criticism with
delightful recollections of the great times in which
he lived. A personal account of Victoria and
Prince Albert, the “Dialogue on Old Age” which
affords the title for the volume, a review of the
picturesque history of Constantinople through sixteen
centuries, fundamental differences between
Greek and Elizabethan tragedy, the art of translation
with reference to Dante and Molière, some consideration
of Fielding and Smollett and Kingsley,
and a final chapter upon various schools of philosophy—these
are the relics of a glorious life. The
book is full of brightness, its effects are sane, and
the writing is alike lucid and tinctured with that
peculiar zest which, as it was a quality of Frederic
Harrison’s temperament, goes far to explain the
length of his life as well as the grace with which
he lived it.
Among essayists there are ladies. But there are
not many ladies, nor men, either, who have taken
rank in the essay with a single book. I understand
that Katharine Fullerton Gerould would rather
prefer to be known for her fiction—those short
stories, masterly in form, with which she began and
such a work as her most recent, the brief novel,
Conquistador. And such a preference is easily understood.
Conquistador, a jewel with many facets,
would seduce any woman. And yet Mrs. Gerould’s
collection of essays, Modes and Morals, published
in 1920, had an extraordinary sale for a book of its
character, and still steadily sells. People constantly
refer to her discussion of “The Remarkable Rightness
of Rudyard Kipling” and the arts of persuasion
are constantly brought to bear upon her to assemble
another such book. If Mrs. Gerould began with
something of the suddenness of a meteor, she persists
with a good deal of the steady brilliance of a
fixed star. It was, in fact, with the appearance
of a story, “Vain Oblations,” in Scribner’s Magazine
for March, 1911, that she first came to general
notice. This dark and terrible piece of fictional
analysis had for its principal character a New England
woman missionary. Other stories followed in
Scribner’s, the Atlantic and Harper’s, and a first
collection, under the title Vain Oblations, was published
in March, 1914. A second book of tales, The
Great Tradition, was succeeded by a novelette,
A Change of Air; by the essays comprising Modes
and Morals; and then by the novel, Lost Valley.
Valiant Dust offered some more short tales; but with
the appearance of Conquistador many of us felt
Mrs. Gerould for the first time to be perfectly
suited in length, form and material alike. Despite
her superb technique, she needs more room than
the short story gives her; and although she can
write of barren New England lives she can write
much more effectively of richly-coloured Latin life.
Although, as Stuart P. Sherman has observed, she
can do dashingly the “picture of a really nice
woman meditating a fracture of the seventh commandment
in a spacious sun-flooded chamber with
a Chinese rug,” her deep fictional desires are toward
the richly barbaric, and neither Henry-Jamesical
nor Edith-Whartonesque. In the atmosphere
of Princeton, which is her home (her husband, Gordon
Hall Gerould, is a member of the English
faculty), she has the leisure and repose necessary
to do such essays and short novels as no other living
American has given evidence of an equal talent for
achieving. Occasionally a bit of travel, perhaps,
producing as its direct result a book like her Hawaii,
Scenes and Impressions; but ultimately much more
valuable for its indirect stimulus to her imagination,
which belongs to the class of imaginations so dangerous
when they are confined.
In fact, the imagination is very little understood,
as if it were one of those glands whose mysterious
secretions we tinker with nowadays, either not too
successfully or with a success so alarming as to
threaten the overthrow of all physiology. One of
these days we shall have a mental thyroid extract,
and then—! It remains to be observed that
with most of us the imagination secretes gently,
with a fresh annual activation in the direction of
old woods and pastures ever-new, rather than new;
a circumstance very favourable to David Grayson
when, in 1907, he put forth the volume called
Adventures in Contentment. It is difficult to think
of any precise precedent for this mixture of essay,
philosophy, homely observation and quiet humour
with its essentially American pattern of thought.
The febrile character of much American life was
already marked, and the remedy of an equally
feverish optimism had yet to be widely prescribed.
The time was propitious, the sentiment of David
Grayson had an ingratiation. When, in 1910,
Adventures in Friendship was published, a good
many thousand people had read the earlier adventures
and were alert for these. The Friendly Road
(1913) was succeeded by Hempfield (1915) and a
final volume, Great Possessions (1917). A half
dozen years have passed without relegating these
books to the shelves of the Great Unread. As “The
Library of the Open Road” they inherit an annual,
rather a perennial, popularity.
ii
In the course of reading a great number of travel
books, I have come to prefer my Baedekers to all
others. The worthy Karl’s “handbooks for travellers”
are not only the standard guides (and likely
to remain so) but they seem to me perfect in their
exactitude, their literalness and their discreet prescriptions
for the visitor’s emotions. If I wish to
know the number of yards to walk from the castle
gate and the right entrance through which to pass
to emerge upon a View, I wish also to know in
a general way how to graduate my feelings on beholding
the spectacle spread out at my feet. And
this, Baedeker tells me. By the unstarred, starred
or double-starred nature of his reference to the
View, I know with reassurance whether my emotional
response should be elementary, intermediate
or advanced. Moreover, there is lacking no concrete
detail from which the fancy may launch itself.
To read Baedeker is to use one’s own wings, and
not somebody else’s. This is a great virtue; for in
book travels, as perhaps in other travel, it is much
more desirable to make one’s own appraisal than
to accept another’s description of the beauties of a
place. And I really have known a novelist to reject
every particular travel book dealing with a certain
town or region in which his scene was laid, because
he felt hampered by their emotionality and their impressionism
and a quality of vagueness, and turn
with joy and relief to his Baedeker’s Mediterranean
or Northern Italy or Spain and Portugal. Here the
matters essential to accuracy were given—and only
a novelist who has heard the protest of literal-minded
readers can know the penalties of a topographical
mistake—but the perfectly-set stage stood
cleared for the actors of his writer’s imagination.
For the benefit of those attending the assemblies of
the League of Nations, one of the most freshly revised
volumes is Baedeker’s Switzerland; another
of equal recency is the guide to Canada.
In spite of the twenty-seven books of the Baedeker
series, there is a good deal of the world which
is not even touched upon in these famous guides,
which are, after all and with slight exception, properties
for the tourist in Europe and the Mediterranean
countries. The tourist, however, more and
more declines to stick to Europe, a large number
of him having seen Europe pretty thoroughly anyway.
As for the tourist in fancy, he goes everywhere.
The business man is another traveller who
is omni-itinerant. I suppose the widest audience
for the series of books called “Carpenter’s World
Travels” is composed of what one commentator
rightly describes as “the incalculable company of
stay-at-home travellers.” Frank G. Carpenter himself
is the best guarantee that the matter and form
of the planned twenty-five volumes will remain as
excellent as in the seven already brought out. For
over thirty years this highly skilled journalist has
walked the earth, even to the ends of the earth, and
written of what he saw. Some four million copies
of his Geographic Readers have sold to the public
schools, and an equal number of families now open
their newspapers once a week to find his new series
of letters from the countries of Europe. In fact,
Mr. Carpenter is a publicist of so vast and important
an audience that Governments have been
glad to give him access to every official source of
information, and various rulers and prime ministers
have at one and another time especially commissioned
him in facilitation of his work. The many
and exceptional photographs in his hands have made
it possible to plan the use of about one hundred of
the best in each volume of the series now under way.
Java and the East Indies and France to Scandinavia
(France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway
and Sweden) are his latest additions to the
beginning made with The Holy Land and Syria.
From Tangier to Tripoli (Morocco, Algeria, Tunis
and the Sahara), Alaska, Our Northern Wonderland,
The Tail of the Hemisphere (Chile and Argentina)
and Cairo to Kisumu (Egypt, the Anglo-Egyptian
Sudan, and British East Africa) were the
intermediate books.
“Adopted as a motto this year, ‘The world is my
parish,’” wrote down Stephen Graham, at the end
of his travel record for 1921—a record that begins
with that first pilgrimage of his to Russia in 1906.
Even so, he finds parts of his parish yet unvisited,
and the next year saw him off on fresh Latin trails.
It had come over him, indeed, to traverse some
15,000 miles that represent one of the most fabulous
of mankind’s adventures. Graham had a thought
to approach our present America in the path of those
first explorers and in the spirit of the conquistadores,
following Columbus from Spain to the Indies,
Balboa to the peak in Darien whence he saw the
Pacific, Cortes to the conquest of Montezuma’s
capital, and Coronado on the fruitless quest into the
deserts of New Mexico and Arizona. What happened?
Why, in the words of Vachel Lindsay,
Graham’s tramp companion in the Rockies:
Then I had religion, then I had a vision—
and Graham, whose intimacy with Russian life and
thought has deeply enriched a natural mystical
endowment, found a significant theme in the Spanish
quest for gold succeeded, after four centuries,
by the American quest of power—religion the sanctification
of one, pan-Americanism the credo of the
other. It is this spiritual penetration that makes
the fine distinction of Stephen Graham’s In Quest
of El Dorado, joined to the man’s unusual literary
skill, taste and sense of form. On the point of form
there is something more than usually admirable in
the start of the book from Madrid and Cadiz and in
the conclusion (on a note of wonder) amid the
ruins of Mitla, as if the quester for El Dorado
would do well to seek its whereabouts in the indecipherable
inscriptions placed on their massive
memorials by a race that had sunk into silence long
before the imperious advent of the Children of the
Sun. These are the refinements of the book for
the reader of philosophical or æsthetic tastes; but
as such matters should be, they are entirely unobtrusive—present
to those who seek them, hidden
to those who are indifferent—and in externals
Stephen Graham offers a first-hand travel study
with cowboys and conquistadores, Indians and
Mexicans, the Panama Canal and the jingle of spurs
in the changing foreground.
Among those authors whose books of travel win
their appreciation from the personality of the adventurer,
Mary Roberts Rinehart seems to me quite
plainly the foremost. The considerable time that
has elapsed since the publication of Through Glacier
Park and Tenting Tonight will sharpen many appetites
for the camp fare offered in her new book, The
Out Trail. With none of the acerbity of her own
Tish, Mrs. Rinehart has to the full that lady’s
derring-do. “I have roughed it,” she explains at
the beginning of The Out Trail, “in one wilderness
after another, in camp and on the trail, in the air
and on water, in war abroad and in peace at home.
I have been scared to death more times than I can
remember. Led,” she confesses, “by the exigencies
of my profession, by feminine curiosity, or by the
determination not to be left at home, I have been
shaken, thrown, bitten, sunburned, rained on, shot
at, stone-bruised, frozen, broiled, and scared, with
monotonous regularity.” And she adds that on several
occasions she has been placed in situations of
real danger from which she has clamoured to be
extricated with all possible despatch. Two things,
if we may judge by her chronicle, seem never to
have failed her, in whatever emergency: her sense
of drama and her sense of humour. At least, they
are keenly in evidence on all the pages of The Out
Trail, and make it easily among the most entertaining
books of its kind—not infrequently exciting,
too! If someone thinks that the sense of the
humorous must have been missing at the time
and have been recaptured later in writing of the
adventures, I suspect he is mistaken; for I
recall that not so long after I had written a
chapter on “The Vitality of Mary Roberts Rinehart”
as a novelist, I met Mrs. Rinehart. She was
suffering from one of those ferocious colds which
make cowards and pessimists of us all, but she only
remarked: “I’m afraid you will find the vitality
you have just celebrated rather low this morning.”
This, I submit, is such stuff as humorists are
made on.
iii
Among books of essays that successfully spread
the Magic Carpet for readers I should like to draw
attention to the following (in addition to those
described above):
ROBERT CORTES HOLLIDAY’SIn the Neighborhood
of Murray Hill. J. C. SQUIRE’SEssays at Large and his Books
Reviewed. HILAIRE BELLOC’SOn.
Other collections of essays, chiefly on literary and
philosophical subjects, are included in or listed
after Chapter 15, “For the Literary Investor.”
iv
In the matter of books of travel, some classification
is necessary, and in addition to the ones just
described I am glad to name the following in all
their happy variety:
A Group of Books on Ancient Egypt and
Present-day Egyptian Explorations.
A History of Egypt From the Earliest Times to
the Conquest of the Persians, by JAMES HENRY
BREASTED. The ninth printing has just been called
for. With 200 illustrations and maps.
History of Assyria, by A. T. OLMSTEAD. A companion
volume to Breasted’s History of Egypt, and
equally admirable. With maps and many illustrations.
G. MASPERO’SLife in Ancient Egypt and Assyria,
his Egyptian Art: Studies, and his History of
Art in Egypt. These remain standard in their
field.
TERENCE GRAY’SAnd in the Tomb Were Found
and his The Life of Hatshepsut. The first is a series
of historical studies and sketches including Khufu,
builder of the Great Pyramid, and Rameses the
Great. Some literal translations of Egyptian love
songs are added. The second book is the romance
of an Egyptian princess who reigns as a man; the
work is cast in the form of a pageant for the sake
of greater vividness.
PERCY E. MARTIN’SEgypt Old and New, a general
account with many illustrations in colour.
PERCY EDWARD NEWBERRY’SThe Valley of the
Kings, which includes the discoveries by the late
Lord Carnarvon and Howard Carter in a general
account of thirty years’ explorations.
ARTHUR WEIGALL’STut-Ankh-Amen and Other
Essays is the work of an Egyptologist and former
Inspector-General of Antiquities in Egypt. Mr.
Weigall was special correspondent for the London
Daily Mail, New York World and other newspapers
at the opening of the tomb of Tut-Ankh-Amen.
A Group of Books About China.
Audacious Angles on China, by ELSIE MCCORMICK,
introduces the reader to Chinese life as the Western
resident there sees it. The humorous side of such
experiences is to the fore, and one part of the book
is devoted to “The Unexpurgated Diary of a Shanghai
Baby”—an American child’s view of the intimacies
of Eastern life.
Swinging Lanterns, by ELIZABETH CRUMP ENDERS,
is a vivid narrative of what an American
woman saw while living and travelling in China.
It contains much that is unusual, including such
matters as the Yellow Llama Devil Dances, never
before described. Fine illustrations.
ROY CHAPMAN ANDREWS’SAcross Mongolian
Plains.
ROY CHAPMAN ANDREWS’S and YVETTE BORUP
ANDREWS’SCamps and Trails in China.
HERBERT A. GILES’SA History of Chinese Literature,
a historical account written with much charm
and taste and offering translations of the work of
various Chinese writers.
The Far East.
C. M. VAN TYNE’SIndia in Ferment. Mahatma
Gandhi and the general background by a scholar
and skilled observer.
SIR HUGH CLIFFORD’SA Prince of Malaya and
his earlier book, The Further Side of Silence. These
are stories, true, fictional and semi-fictional, that
take rank as literature. The author, a friend of
Joseph Conrad, at the age of twenty-one was “the
principal instrument in adding 15,000 square miles
to the British dependencies in the East.”
SYDNEY A. CLOMAN’SMyself and a Few Moros.
An American soldier’s lively but not unhumorous
administrative experiences, with a good picture of
what the United States has accomplished in colonial
government.
H. O. MORGENTHALER’SMatahari. The Frederick
O’Brienish adventures of a Swiss engineer prospecting
for tin in the Malayan-Siamese jungle.
The Callers of the Wild.
ERNEST THOMPSON SETON’SGame Animals and
the Lives They Live, Vol. I. There are to be four
volumes.
WILLIAM T. HORNADAY’SThe Minds and Manners
of Wild Animals, a book of personal observations
by one of the keenest living observers and one
who, as director of the New York Zoological Park,
has under his eye and care the most complete collection
in the world.
SAMUEL A. DERIEUX’SAnimal Personalities, including
domesticated animals.
CARL AKELEY’SMen and Animals: An Autobiography
and MARY HASTINGS BRADLEY’SOn the
Gorilla Trail. Mr. Akeley went to the Belgian
Congo on a gorilla expedition, and Mrs. Bradley,
well-known as a novelist, her husband and their
five-year-old daughter went, too. Each book enhances
the interest of the other.
With Ice.
APSLEY CHERRY-GARRARD’SThe Worst Journey
in the World, describing, in its two volumes, Scott’s
last Antarctic expedition, 1910-13.
Mediterranean.
V. C. SCOTT O’CONNOR’SA Vision of Morocco,
which is both historical and descriptive, and C. E.
ANDREWS’SOld Morocco and the Forbidden Atlas,
written in a distinguished prose.
C. R. ASHBEE’SA Palestine Notebook, the result
of administrative experience in 1918-22. The book
has interesting personal portraits of Sir Herbert
Samuels, General Allenby, Lord Robert Cecil, Lord
Morley, the late Lord Northcliffe, Lord Curzon, and
others.
G. K. CHESTERTON’SThe New Jerusalem.
ERNEST PEIXOTTO’SThrough Spain and Portugal,
where the author’s illustrations are so happily
wedded to the text.
ROSITA FORBES’SThe Secret of the Sahara:
Kufara.
South America.
C. REGINALD ENOCK’SRepublics of Central and
South America, his Spanish America (two volumes),
his Ecuador, his Peru, and his Mexico.
LEO E. MILLER’SIn the Wilds of South America,
an account of six years’ explorations.
Unique Books of Travel.
GEORGE EYRE-TODD’SThe Clans of the Scottish
Highlands. By an authority on Scots lore.
VAUGHAN CORNISH’SA Geography of the Great
Capitals, from the “capital” of the Iroquois Indians,
marked by a sacred fire, to the capitals of government,
such as Rome and London, or of commerce,
such as New York, and including vanished cities
as well as existing ones.
THOMAS NELSON PAGE’SWashington and Its Romance,
really a historical work. Mr. Page had
been engaged upon it for several years before his
death and left completed his account of the city’s
early days.
S. R. ROGET’STravel in the Two Last Centuries
of Three Generations, a remarkable history, vivid,
personal and interesting, derived from the records
and letters of a single family and showing what
rapid changes transportation underwent in the short
period of two hundred years.
B. W. MATZ’SDickensian Inns and Taverns, and
his The Inns and Taverns of Pickwick, and also
CECIL ALDRIN’S magnificent Old Inns—for all who
hear the post horns blow and the stage coach drive
up to the door.
STEPHEN GRAHAM’STramping With a Poet in
the Rockies, the description of a vagabondage with
Vachel Lindsay, with a report of many conversations
which left the ground.
3. A Breathless Chapter
i
WHAT actually took my breath away (in the
first place) was an inspection of the “general
catalogue” of one of our publishing houses, and a
discovery therein. Now, a general catalogue, showing
all the books published by a particular house
and “in print”—that is, procurable new—is in itself
a species of adventure. I admit all that Mr. A.
Edward Newton puts forward as to the amenities
of book collecting—by which, I take it, he means
the joys, the sorrows, the moments of irony and
the moments of amusement which fall to the lot of
the collector of rare books. The quest of the book
that is out of print, and must be had at second hand
by diligent search and patient waiting, is an exceptional
delight. Nevertheless, a special and more
accessible pleasure lies in the catalogue, whether
of a publisher or a bookshop. All but a handful
of us are certain to come upon titles that kindle
the imagination or rekindle the memory. Both were
lit for me by the entry:
Gaboriau, Emile
The Most Complete Library Edition
Each with new illustrated jackets The Count’s Millions. 12mo. 2.00
And not only The Count’s Millions, but a roll of
eleven others, an even dozen in all, ready to be
re-read after these too many years and pleasingly
freshened up by the new illustrated jackets! There
they were: Baron Trigault’s Vengeance, The Clique
of Gold, and a fine array of enticing titles that
memory doesn’t recall—The Champdoce Mystery,
Within an Inch of His Life, which has the proper
ring; The Widow Lerouge; Other People’s Money,
always an engrossing subject; The Mystery of
Orcival (illustrated by Jules Guerin) and one or
two others besides (of course!) Monsieur Lecoq and
that famous File No. 113. It is desolating to reflect
that there must be thousands, perhaps millions,
to whom the name of Monsieur Lecoq conveys
nothing and who are totally unacquainted with
File No. 113, the most marvellous genealogical
mystery story ever written, a tale in which one does
not know which more to admire, the genealogy or
the plot, until one grasps that the genealogy is the
plot, and that what is desperately needed is not a
detective but an expert in the ascension of family
trees. However, that is not the worst. A yet more
fearful thought concerns the author himself. It is
even possible that there exists a whole generation,
and perhaps races of men, to whom the name of
Gaboriau is nothing but part of a quatrain (though
rather a famous jingle) perpetrated first by Julian
Street and James Montgomery Flagg under
the auspices (I think) of Franklin P. Adams
(“F. P. A.”):
Said Opie Read to E. P. Roe,
“How do you like Gaboriau?”
“I like him very much indeed!”
Said E. P. Roe to Opie Read.
Too, too flippant! Recalling Monsieur Lecoq, one
exclaims: “There were detectives in those days!”
And then again, such despondency is excessive.
There is, now and occasionally, a detective in these
days also. For proof, look at this fellow, Monsieur
Jonquelle, in Melville Davisson Post’s new book
of that title. Ah! M. Davisson Post! It is but
to mention him to introduce a new and important
subject, n’est ce pas?
Mr. Post is worth talking about, certainly; and
assuming that you have read him, you have probably
discussed what you read afterward. His
reputation as a writer of detective-mystery stories
was pretty well abroad before the publication of
Uncle Abner, Master of Mysteries, but that book
established the reputation solidly. My recollection
is that even before its appearance Mr. Post had
written one or two articles in which he explained
his theory and practice of story writing. I may
simply remark that he went into the matter with
as much technical skill and artistic nicety as Poe
or de Maupassant; the man is an artist to his fingertips
and his work shows it. One has the feeling
of construction and the sense of ornamentation
springing from fine tastes; his tales are like beautiful
pieces of cabinet work in which, at first sight, the
effects of form, of shapeliness and of beauty and
power are felt; on a closer examination you fall to
admiring the sure hand and the cunning art; and
at last your exploring fingers touch a particular
joint, disclosing an unsuspected drawer that flies
out and reveals the story’s secret ... though not
Mr. Post’s secret, which, like that of all genuine
artists, remains with himself. If this has a ring
of exaggeration to your ear, I need only refer you
to such a perfect thing as the opening tale, “The
Doomdorf Mystery,” in Uncle Abner. Or you
may make the test on Monsieur Jonquelle, where
likewise all the stories turn on a central character,
the Prefect of Police of Paris. Monsieur Jonquelle
exemplifies very well Mr. Post’s method of developing
the mystery and its solution side by side. The
gain in movement and surprise is the compensation
for a technique immensely more difficult than the
usual formula, by which a mystery is first built up
and then, with inevitable repetition, dispelled.
Those who are interested in the mechanism of
stories will also find it worth while to consider why
Mr. Post varies the narrative standpoint in his new
book, so that some of the tales of Monsieur Jonquelle
are related by the chief character, some by
a third person, some by the author.... Mr. Post
is a native of West Virginia, where he lives (Lost
Creek, R. F. D. 2). A lawyer by training, he became
particularly interested in the possibilities that
lie open for the use of the law to aid the commission
of crime; and this led to his first book, The Strange
Schemes of Randolph Mason, in which this perversion
of the law to criminal ends was the tissue of
the stories.
A rural free delivery route at Lost Creek, West
Virginia, has about it something pleasing in connection
with a writer of breathless fiction, but the
height of suitability in authors’ residences belongs
to Beatrice Grimshaw, whose mystery-adventure
yarns of the South Pacific begin to be as numerous
as a group of Pacific Islands. Indeed, I feel it
would be no surprise some day, running before the
southeasterly trade wind in a longitude west of 135
degrees and a latitude exceeding 20 degrees south,
to sight a succession of dark blue cloud shapes lying
on the horizon and be told: “Yonder’s the Beatrice
Islands of the Grimshaw group—big archipelago.”
Beatrice Grimshaw lives at Port Moseby, Papua,
New Guinea, and is a planter as well as an author.
There is practically no place in the South Seas which
she has not visited, including the cannibal country
of Papua. An old and possibly untrue story recalled
by Hector MacQuarrie tells of a time when,
on a schooner in mid-Pacific, “the captain, a gentle
ancient, thinking that the dark women were having
it all their own way, offered to embrace Miss Grimshaw,
finding in return a gun pointing at his middle,
filling him with quaint surprise that anyone could
possibly offer violence in defence of a soul in so
delightful a climate.” Anyway, the lady knows
her corner of the world and the people in it, as anyone
may discover by the exciting enterprise of reading
such a book as The Sands of Oro, with its
strange group of five persons bound together by
necessity and ugly chance, and committed to each
other’s fortunes for a term on a lonely Pacific
island. Here, as in the author’s Nobody’s Island,
the reader is at once let into the general secret with
the result of a deepening mystery as to why and
how and what next.
In truth, the tale which attempts breathlessness
simply by the device of withheld explanations takes
our breath away no longer. We have come to demand
of the author that he proceed with direct
and forward action, producing genuine interest instead
of merely artificial suspense. He must hew
to the line of his story, must move, letting the explanations,
chips of his tough puzzle, fall where
they may. Thus it has come about that the mystery
story which is not also an adventure story fails
to capture our interest or stir our curiosity. Of
living writers, one of the earliest to grasp this was
A. E. W. Mason. With others, I feared a half
dozen years ago that he might have forgotten the
vital principle; for his story of The Summons was
quite unlike the Mason who had given us The Four
Feathers, The Witness for the Defense, and other
superb novels. But the fear may be dissipated, for
in his new book, The Winding Stair, Mr. Mason
has written a story comparable with his best work.
Like The Four Feathers, it is a tale of cowardice
becoming ultimate bravery; and I do not recall a
heroine so pitifully appealing, so desperately lovable,
so admirably brave as Marguerite Lambert
since Joseph Conrad gave us the girl Lena in Victory.
Possibly the title of Mr. Mason’s newest
work may, offhand, convey the wrong flavor to the
incipient reader; it is not a yarn of mysterious
goings-on in some old mansion but the history of a
soldier and the son of a soldier, moving principally
in Northern Africa; the very appropriate phrase
that christens the book is quoted from no less
person than Bacon, “All rising to Great Place
is by a winding stair.” Seldom does one come upon
a novel of adventure which is also so profoundly a
novel of character or which has so direct and free
an appeal to the emotions, or makes that appeal
so successfully. The Winding Stair is the work of
a masterly storyteller, and such scenes as those of
Paul Ravenel’s discovery of who he is, his rescue
of Marguerite Lambert, and Marguerite’s discovery
of his self-betrayal sprung from his love for her
are something more than exciting drama. There
is a breathlessness here that comes from a slowing-down
rather than a quickening, from a pause, from
a moment of perilous silence in which the only
sound or sensation is the painful throbbing of the
human heart.
ii
The other way of breathlessness is laughter.
“Laughter, holding both his sides,” sang Milton;
and, in fact, I once knew a man who sat at a dinner
or some place between Don Marquis and Pelham
Grenville (P. G.) Wodehouse. It is not necessary
to recall what happened to him. Let us draw a
veil, and proceed. Don (perhaps you recall it)
was under the necessity of conducting a guessing
contest in a New York newspaper. The purpose
was to guess his real name. People refused to believe
that he could be Don Marquis. The Supreme
Court, in a case brought as a test, has since decided
that such incredulity is not a sign of moral turpitude.
Even Donald Robert Perry Marquis, held
the Court (seven to two; Holmes, J., and Brandeis,
J., dissenting), does not sound sufficiently possible,
especially when the evidence shows that he was born
in Walnut, Bureau County, Illinois. The Court
ruled that Don was conceivably a literary hoax,
but that his play, The Old Soak, was the real thing
and within the Amendment. Popular rather than
judicial cognisance has extended to the other and
uncollected works of Don Marquis, such as Prefaces,
his stories in Carter and Other People, his truth-telling
about a young woman called Hermione, his
newly rededicated record of The Cruise of the
Jasper B., his iliad of Noah an’ Jonah an’ Captain
John Smith, his poetry in Sonnets to a Red-Haired
Lady and Famous Love Affairs, etc., etc. You have
read Anatole France’s The Revolt of the Angels,
but are you familiar with Don’s The Revolt of the
Oyster, I ask you? Or Pandora Lifts the Lid, by
Christopher Morley, writing under the auspices of
Don Marquis? Or The Almost Perfect State, a
vision vouchsafed exclusively to Mr. Marquis?
The truth is, there is a good deal of Mark Twain
in Don Marquis. Don is usually as good as ever
Mark was and in some cases a good deal superior—and
throughout, more genuine. When I make the
comparison I am thinking of the best Mark Twain,
the satirist and not too easily satisfied thinker;
neither the embittered and savage pessimist of those
final years nor the facile (too facile) humourist.
Marquis, who can sustain the severer comparison
with Twain, can also well sustain the comparison
on the lighter side; for Don is a humourist, too.
The point is in the “too.” And the exemplification
may be sought in (let us say) The Almost Perfect
State. “No matter how nearly perfect an Almost
Perfect State may be, it is not nearly perfect enough
unless the individuals who compose it can, somewhere
between death and birth, have a perfectly
corking time for a few years.... In the Almost
Perfect State every person shall have at least ten
years before he dies of easy, carefree, happy living.”
A place of pay-as-you-enter wars; a heaven where
everyone is an aristocrat and there are no professional
reformers—in short, a Marquisate. Where
Don differs from Mark Twain is in being a poet
who sometimes uses poetry as the medium of his
expression—see Dreams and Dust and his Poems
and Portraits. Christopher Morley (whose essay
on Don Marquis, in Shandygaff, deserves to be
read) has coaxed Don into a Frank R. Stocktonish
enterprise in Pandora Lifts the Lid, with its
narrative of seven young women snatched from the
shades of a young ladies’ seminary and—. But
as I write, Pandora has lifted the lid on a crack
only.
P. G. Wodehouse is another matter, a chap over
whose books thousands of people have found themselves
unable to keep straight faces. Yet, not long
ago, writing in the London Sphere, Clement K.
Shorter declared he had never read a single one
of the more than twenty Wodehouse yarns. He
had never read Jeeves, or that new one, Leave It to
Psmith, or Mostly Sally, or Three Men and a Maid,
or The Little Warrior, or A Damsel in Distress, or
Piccadilly Jim—think of it! Or no, don’t think
of it. It won’t bear thinking of, it won’t really.
The Wodehouse novels, though in most respects
like those jolly things he writes to go with music
by Jerome Kern, have now and then a page that
dips far below the surface of fun into something
very deep and true to the inwardness of human
nature. Such are some bits in The Little Warrior,
and such are the more tragic moments for Sally in
Mostly Sally; and yet Mr. Wodehouse brings his
story up again quickly like a diver clutching a pearl
and rising up through clear water to sparkling and
sunlit air. It is the prettiest talent imaginable, and
I can think of no other contemporary writer of light
fiction who has the same dexterity.
iii
There is no formula for achieving breathlessness.
Those who are most susceptible to what may
be loosely called Plot will find an enviable difficulty
in breathing while they peruse, besides the
stories already mentioned, some of the following
tales:
JOHN BUCHAN’SMidwinter and his Huntingtower.
Buchan is a master of suspense and a
humourist of very exceptional quality. His stories
are rightly called “the grandest of grand yarns.”
Have you ever read Greenmantle? The literary
merit of these books (quite incidental) is far above
the average of their kind.
FRANK L. PACKARD’SThe Four Stragglers, an
“unguessable” story with a steady acceleration of
excitement, and his new one, The Locked Book.
WILLIAM GARRET’SFriday to Monday, which
will give you the liveliest week-end of your possibly
rich experience. Black pearls, a Chinaman, torture,
a fight in the dark, a rocky cavern of the sea and
an airplane are used.
WILLIAM JOHNSTON’SThe Waddington Cipher.
H. C. MCNEILE’SThe Dinner Club. The six
members had each to tell two stories worthy of the
dinner, and did! Also H. C. McNeile’s The Black
Gang, with its further adventures of Bulldog
Drummond.
ALBERT PAYSON TERHUNE’SThe Amateur Inn,
remarkable not only for its mystery puzzle but for
the presence of an irresistible maiden lady who
says: “A person not ashamed to lock a door with a
key, need not be ashamed to lock his mind with a
lie.”
CAROLYN WELL’SWheels Within Wheels, another
story with Penny Wise as the detective. The
village idiot is a protagonist.
C. N. and A. M. WILLIAMSON’SThe Lady From
the Air and their The Night of the Wedding.
When Ghost Meets Ghost.
The “borderland” in F. BRITTEN AUSTEN’SOn the
Borderland is the region between the conscious and
the subconscious, assuming that such a neutral zone
exists. The book offers twelve weird stories striking
in their ingenuity.
E. F. BENSON’SSpook Stories.
Ordeal by Water.
TRISTRAM TUPPER’SAdventuring is entirely off
the beaten track of adventure fiction—the story of
a middle-aged, ordinary man whose love for the
songs of the Grecian Sappho quickens his imagination
to a dream of her beauty and leads him into
an homeric sea adventure.
A. HYATT VERRILL’SThe Real Story of the
Pirate. A fascinating book about those fellows
whose colouring is perhaps a little faded in spite of
their being scoundrels of the deepest dye; although
(as you may not know) Kidd was by no means so
black as he was hanged for being.
A. HYATT VERRILL’SThe Real Story of the
Whaler. More thrills for all of us who had ’em
as we watched the film, “Down to the Sea in Ships.”
Almost Anything by HAROLD MACGRATH.
His The World Outside, or, if you haven’t read
them:
The Ragged Edge The Pagan Madonna The Man With Three Names The Drums of Jeopardy
iv
Let us approach the subject of humour circumspectly.
In addition to the Works of DON MARQUIS,
passim, as the reference books say, and the Works
of P. G. WODEHOUSE, both before-mentioned, and
the Works of DONALD OGDEN STEWART (see Chapter
13, “A Parody Outline of Stewart”), and the
Works of IRVIN S. COBB in many places, the reader
may be well advised to consult at the outset TomMasson’s Annual for 1923, a humorous anthology;
KATHARINE DAYTON’SLoose Leaves, IRVIN COBB’S
collection of the best humorous stories he has ever
met, A Laugh a Day Keeps the Doctor Away, and—oh,
yes!—the Works of OLIVER HERFORD, including
Neither Here Nor There and This Giddy Globe.
A word of warning in regard to a couple of others:
FRANCIS B. KEENE’SLyrics of the Links. This
is not a humorous book on days when you are off
your game. Still, you can’t afford to miss Grantland
Rice’s foreword to the lyrics.
THOMAS L. MASON’SThat Silver Lining, although
written largely in a humorous vein, is an
honest-to-goodness book about new thought, mental
healing, psycho-analysis and so forth, by a survivor
of twenty-eight years of Life.
4. In the Kingdom of Conrad
i
I ONCE knew such a man,” declared Marlow.
I don’t believe any of us felt moved to reply.
To have indicated, by a syllable or two, a polite
interest, would have been fatal. Marlow, in the
presence of anything but an aloof skepticism or a
cynical reserve, becomes tiresome in his pursuit of
metaphysical abstraction. He seems to think it
can be caught in the butterfly-net of words....
Now he sat, sucking his pipe (he always cools it
before re-filling) and looking attentively at each of
us as the sparks of cigars momentarily threw a faint
gleam on our faces. At length:
“You all know him, too,” he pronounced.
“Chap named Conrad, Joseph Conrad. Teodor
Jozef Konrad Korzeniowski. That Polish sailor;
writes novels. But he has a master’s ticket. Got
blackwater fever or something down at the Congo;
he was out East before that. Then he settled in
Kent, in a little house, where I once went to see
him. Of course you’ve read Lord Jim; I don’t
think a lot of it. Give me Victory or Youth, or, best
of all, Nostromo——”
“Personally, Marlow, I always look at the end
first, to see how it comes out. Since you are beginning
in the middle——”
“I? I’m not, but Conrad was. Did you ever
read Nostromo? Talk about beginning a story in
the middle!”
“Well, if you want to talk about that,” sighed
a voice. “My impression was, Marlow, that you
were undertaking to tell us about a man who knew
himself—shall we say?—singularly well.”
“Exactly.” Marlow uttered the word with something
that might have been reluctance. He repeated
it, “Exactly.” It was time to re-fill his pipe
and he made a long job of it. When he had it
drawing nicely and began to speak again his voice
was veiled, his choice of words was frequently made
with a certain hesitation, and we listened without
comment or any other interruption than the occasional
shifting of a foot on the deck. At least, I
can recall nothing; and I know we borrowed our
matches by signs—when we thought to borrow them.
JOSEPH CONRAD
ii
“As you have heard something of him, I won’t
waste my breath on the bare biographical record,”
Marlow informed us. “I believe you all know he
was born in the Ukraine in 1857; sixth of December
happened to be the day. His father and mother
were Polish patriots and Russian exiles and their
death left the boy in the hands of his mother’s
brother, who used him affectionately and engaged
a very capable tutor to fit the young Korzeniowski
for the University of Cracow. It is pertinent, I
think, that the father had been a man of scholarly
tastes and occupation. He had succeeded in translating
Shakespeare into Polish. The legendary figure
of a great-uncle, whom, however, the boy had
seen, made a great impression. Mr. Nicholas B.,
as Conrad calls him in his book, A Personal Record,
was in the retreat from Moscow and had the strange
misfortune to share in eating a Lithuanian dog.
Did you ever read Falk? Mr. Nicholas B. transmuted
into fiction, I should say. The one had eaten
a dog, the other was credited with having eaten
human flesh; but the effect is the same. Then
there’s that other story, Heart of Darkness—the one
all the authorities acclaim as among the half-dozen
greatest stories in English. I have heard Conrad
narrate the actual incident as it befell him down
at the Congo; I have also read, and heard him read
aloud, his tale. Very interesting. Let us admit that
truth is frequently stranger than fiction; what then?
Why truth is so often unintelligible, void of significance,
without meaning. Whereas fiction is the real
truth—all we can grasp, anyway. How we abuse
words! It is facts, or apparent facts, that are
stranger than so-called fiction. Not truth! Let us
save that word for finer purposes. The conquest
of brute facts? Well, maybe.
“This Polish boy I am telling you about had an
incomprehensible wish. I understand that nowadays
there is no such animal as an incomprehensible
wish. All wishes are fulfilled, or something of the
sort. The boy’s wish I am speaking of was fulfilled,
safe enough, but its comprehensibility is still in
doubt. At any rate, he wanted to go to sea. As
almost all boys wish urgently to go to sea, this might
not appear abnormal. Perhaps, after all the oddity
lay chiefly in the attitude of his uncle and tutor,
which was strongly adverse; also, to some extent,
in the fact that Poland is (or then was) purely an
interior country without ships or the enticing sight
of sailors to tempt a boy. A country of farmers.
And he left it. He has told in A Personal Record
of the last stand made by the tutor and his uncle.
The sight of an Englishman in the Alps had the
mysterious effect of making the lad more set in his
purpose than ever. Why, as I say, is not comprehensible,
unless by those serious scientists who
exist in Vienna and play jokes on the rest of the
world.
“When he had got clean away, with a sorrowful
blessing, he fared to the Mediterranean. He wanted
to become not merely a sailor but a British sailor;
he knew no English. French, of course, he knew,
as befitted a Pole of a good family and some education.
It was not so difficult to get berths on Mediterranean
vessels. Being in his teens, he was looking
for excitement and adventure. This, too,
mare nostrum provides. It does not really matter, I
take it, where one sows his wild oats, provided only
he sows thickly; and the waters of the Mediterranean
received a bushel or two from Poland (a
strictly agricultural land). One harvests such a
crop from the sea uncertainly and at a long interval,
but the sea’s return is often curious and beautiful.
Fragments, if you like, but of a loveliness not
yielded by the soil of the shore; mother-of-pearl’d,
glistening. And out of that uncouth time and those
bizarre experiences the man Conrad has got back
certain pages in The Mirror of the Sea, pages that
we all remember. The Arrow of Gold, also, is the
return of those years when he was irregularly employed
in smuggling and gun-running out of Marseilles
to the loosely-guarded shores of Spain.
“There is a woman in The Arrow of Gold, Rita,
you know ... but it is useless to speculate about
women. In a preface provided for the new uniform
edition of his works, J. C. explains that the slightly
demure Antonia Avellanos, in the pages of Nostromo,
sprang from the recollection, tenderly cherished,
of a young girl, a schoolmate of his back
there in Poland. But I would like to know where
he got Lena, in Victory. If I were Somerset
Maugham and came unexpectedly upon Lena in
another man’s novel there would be no limit to my
jealousy. One does not expect a sailor to understand
women and I cannot for the life of me comprehend
how J. C. got in the way of knowing the
sex. Perhaps, for some time, he didn’t. Disregarding
the mysteries of feminine nature, if he
observed any, the youth persisted in his weird determination
to become one of the great race of
sailors. He shipped on English ships. Richard
Curle’s book, Joseph Conrad: A Study, will even
tell you just which English ships. For example,
the story called Youth with its vessel, the Judæa,
harks back to a passage on a hulk called the Palestine.
And so on. But what are such things to
you and me? I have read Curle’s book and I give
you my parole d’honneur that I found it extraordinarily
confusing when not simply rhapsodical.
I did! As if J. C. were not, in himself, serious
enough to require close attention and profound
enough to merit it and pellucid enough to reward
our most earnest scrutiny. Along comes Curle and
roils up the surface of that clear, deep stream. I
have no forgiveness for such a man, upon my word,
I have not! May his excellent intentions pave the
road to ... but I suppose they do force one to
re-read Conrad if only to get straightened out again.
“Anyway, he stuck to ships, this foreign blighter.
You will find all that is pertinent diffused through
the pages of A Personal Record. Even to the examination
in which he passed for his master’s ticket.
What was he reading in those years? One would
give something to have the tally; but certainly he
did not neglect the French masters. Those who
find in the earlier books, including The Nigger of
the Narcissus, a style ‘too florid,’ or ‘too consciously
sonorous’ say it was because J. C. was long
in understanding that English prose cannot display
the crystal resonance of French. Mind you, I don’t
in the least accept their premise; to me, The Nigger
of the Narcissus is so perfect that when I came upon
it I was seized with a most violent nostalgia. I
wanted, in a foolish, incredible way, to be back in
the fo’c’s’le or on the deck of a certain squarerigger
called the Wayfarer which carried me around Cape
Stiff in—how long ago?—in 1909. It seems a
century. Youth! The splendid, the immortal time!
“The ships bore him eastward. Only the thoughtless,
griped by the vain longing for empire or
inflated with a nauseating self-importance, will go
west. One goes east when one is in search of wisdom,
and this man was. The greatest piece of
wisdom is the knowledge of oneself; seek that in
India or China or the ocean islands, whichever you
please; the road lies eastward. You see, he had
already acquired some self-knowledge; not a great
deal, perhaps, but beyond the average. Or was
he born with it? At a surprisingly early age he
had known that he must, as the saying is, ‘follow the
sea.’ This senseless conviction must be put down
to the score of self-knowledge. When a man is
not misled by that logical apparatus, his brain, it
is astonishing to what clearness of perception he
may attain. Do you recall that gentle, highly
ironic sentence Conrad uses in The Rescue about
d’Alcacer? ‘Mr. d’Alcacer, being a Latin, was not
afraid of introspection.’ Exactly. J. C. isn’t a
Latin but neither is he afflicted like us, who shrink
from a look inward in a way to arouse the recording
angel’s darkest suspicion. The best advice, I believe,
is that which counsels a man to look into his
heart and write. The best advice extant, but it
can be bettered. J. C. looked into his heart a long
time before he began writing.
“All that he saw there we have had steadily
reflected in the succession of novels and tales of a
surprisingly varied character and a deep, a very
deep, inner relevance to the discovered self within
him. Externals do not matter. And yet they have
taken aback visitors to J. C., persons already
acquainted with the true person and who should
therefore have known better. They found, in a
cottage in Kent, a man quitting middle age, the
victim of an atrocious rheumatism (or what seemed
to be rheumatism) who dosed himself with all sorts
of concoctions that he had heard of, until the
house looked like a laboratory of disused patent
medicine bottles. Well, perhaps that is an exaggeration.
Tall and broadly ample Jessie Conrad
beamed on the very infrequent visitors and would
sometimes confide to them, with a giggle: ‘You
know, they say in London that Conrad lives in the
country with his cook!’ But she, Jessie, Mrs. Conrad,
was a great deal more than just an excellent
cook, a capable mother, all that. She was, in
J. C.’s words, ‘the fortune of the house,’ a pair of
eyes that guarded watchfully over this unhappy
man when, for eighteen months, hardly knowing
whether he ate or slept, and sitting all day long at
a table, he struggled desperately for ‘the breath of
life’ which had to be blown into the shapes of men
and women, ‘Latin and Saxon, Jew and Gentile’
who people the pages of that miraculous novel,
Nostromo. That book is unique. You may get
some idea of its cost in toil and sheer creative effort
from J. C.’s own words in A Personal Record.
Just so; but then an American editor comes along,
some years later, and finds Conrad as nervous as a
cat. Actually! The editor particularly noticed
that Conrad would never turn his back upon him
while they were together in that room and always
sat so as to face, or partly face, the door. He appeared
like a man who wanted to feel the wall at
his back; and with his deep-set eyes and the overhang
of his forehead, the Slav contour of the cheekbones,
the greying beard, the silences and the restlessness,
the jumpiness—everything—J. C. made on
the American editor a memorable and fantastic
impression. That editor came away convinced that
J. C. had seen some wild goings-on and been in some
devilish tight places in his seafaring days; and altogether
was spending his later years like Stevenson’s
chap at the Admiral Benbow, waiting for some
old, blind, tap-tap-tapping Pew to come along and
tip him the black spot. Fact! But the editor
carried no black spot, only large sums of American
money which he was prepared to part with in
exchange for the very best English fiction, both spot
and future delivery. J. C. was then busy writing
the novel called Victory, and gave it to the American
to read. The next morning the American
ripped it to pieces, on certain plot details. His,
the American’s, account of that interview is instructive.
He says Conrad sat, fingers clawing the arms
of his chair, speechless and infuriated, for nearly an
hour, while our editor stressed the importance of
the return of the shawl that belonged to Mrs.
Schomberg in the story and other matters that the
meticulous would find fault with. And finally, I
suppose when he was able to speak at all, the editor
tells that J. C. came around, ending up by quite
handsomely admitting the editor to be right, and
promising to make the necessary changes. What I
cannot get over is the fact that after, as the story
goes, Conrad had re-written 70,000 words and added
60,000 more, in order to run Victory complete in a
single number, the American cut out of it everything
but the conversation and the shooting. The resulting
skeleton was, to some readers at least, very
imperfectly articulated. That manuscript had a
curious history and certainly deserves a place
in a Museum. I heard lately that Gabriel Wells,
the American collector, has got hold of it. J. C.
had made alterations in black ink, the magazine
editor had gashed it horribly in red; and
when the book publisher came to restore the
mangled corpus he could do so, intelligibly for the
printer, only by an extravagant use of green ink.
You see, there was no duplicate copy of the original.
Always make duplicates. If you don’t, and
if you are a writer of J. C.’s size, your manuscripts
may some day be priceless. Even though they are
typewritten; for the fact that they are not in handwriting
is offset by the touching fact that perhaps
your wife got up in the middle of the night to type
them off, so you could see how they would look in
the neat similitude of printed words.
iii
“But there! Let us not talk about the value of
manuscripts. That is adventitious, a sort of excrescence
on the process of moneygetting, which, in
turn, perhaps, is an excrescence on all the forms of
art. Do I sound like one of those absurd persons
who wail because an artist must make money? If
so, I beg your pardon, I do, humbly. Perhaps you
would like me to do it kneeling here on the deck.
My knees are bent. I would no more absolve the
artist from the urgence of making a living than I
would absolve him from the necessity of drawing
breath to live. After all, isn’t it the same thing?
So surely as you breathe, you must suffer; and what
is the wage problem but a visitation, like sickness, or
misfortune, or mental anguish inseparable from the
act of living? If art cannot triumph over these
things, if a novelist could not continue to write
novels in spite of the awful pangs of rheumatism,
the element of struggle would be lost and all our
values would exist in a vacuum. It is their merit,
and sometimes their sole merit, that they exist in
the air under atmospheric pressures averaging fifteen
pounds to the square inch and of only the very
slightest variation. The need to make money is
the atmosphere in which we all live. By a sublime
law of nature, of human nature, I should say, the
more we make, the more we need. Human nature
abhors a vacuum. But, as I was saying—
“What a pill it would be to a man engaged in
writing his first few great novels if he had seriously
to consider the fact that, some years later but yet
within his lifetime, these blackened pages would be
worth a modest fortune. Such a consideration might
well drive him quite off his head. What actually
steadies him is the indisputable fact that this book
has simply got to earn him enough to live on for a
whole year, including the younger boy’s annual six
pairs of shoes. Then, when the book doesn’t, a way
is provided. Don’t snort, please. I admit that, on
the face of it, such a solution is improbable. The
answer to that objection is: The solution arrives.
Take J. C. He came ashore with the remnants of
this tropical fever infesting him and a definite
medical mandate enjoining him from all future notion
of following the sea. When a chap is nearing
forty and has spent all his life from boyhood
working up to a master’s ticket and a ship to command,
a decree of that sort is calculated to knock
him out completely. He is in splendid shape to be
counted out in a prostrate condition, lying prone
and never recovering consciousness. J. C. had no
more idea what to do——. He dug up the manuscript
of that tentative story or novel he had been
working on at intervals for about five years. The
one which, to the extent of about the first nine
chapters, he had shown to a young Englishman on
a passage between Adelaide and the Cape. This
was a young Cambridge student, named Jacques,
who was aboard as a passenger. You remember
that Jacques handed the manuscript back and J. C.
ventured to ask if the story seemed worth finishing.
Jacques answered. ‘Distinctly.’ So the beginnings
of Almayer’s Folly escaped being thrown overboard
to puzzle the fishes.
“Ashore, J. C. finished the thing and it got published.
No appreciable sum of money rewarded
him, of course, and he has told how he wondered
whatever he should do afterward, and he submitted
his dilemma to Edward Garnett one evening after
the publication of Almayer’s Folly. Finally Garnett
brought forth a suggestion which, in its
unoriginality, was a piece of the most authentic
inspiration. ‘Why don’t you write another?’ he
asked. But, of course, that is the only safe suggestion
to make to a person who has written one
novel. J. C. admits that from the moment those
words crossed Garnett’s lips, An Outcast of the
Islands was merely a matter of time. All the same,
he had to live. Shortly, he was marrying, and at
suitable intervals Boris and John were added to
the family unit. Capel House was a Kentish cottage
but there were rates to pay. For some years
the pension provided by the Civil List was an affair
of serious importance. There is a man or two now
living and a man or two now dead who could throw
light on this phase of J. C.’s special problem. Conrad’s
present American publisher dropped in one day
on the late William Heinemann in London, with his
usual question of what, or more accurately whom,
Heinemann had got. The reply was: A comparatively
new writer who would some day be as important
as Kipling. However, it appeared that in order
to attain this importance he would have to live.
‘Suppose,’ suggested Heinemann, with every aspect
of intense earnestness, ‘you and I back him. He has
a novel he wants to do. I think if we both put in
ten pounds—fifty dollars—a month——.’ For a
moment it seemed as if this blithe proposal might
terminate the interview. And, after all, a publisher,
who has to foot the cost of a book anyway on what
is often the slenderest chance, might well draw back
before the prospect of investing $50 a month for
a year or two as a preliminary to risking as much
more. But it was done. In the end, J. C. told
them frankly that he could not give them the book.
He had got seven-eighths of the way through and
he was unable to bring the story out. Stuck for
an ending would be the other way of stating the
case. The two, Heinemann and Frank N. Doubleday,
accepted this disappointment with a most
commendable calmness. J. C. went on to write
other things, The Nigger of the Narcissus, Lord
Jim, since so widely hailed and at the time so little
heeded and so immensely unlucrative; Nostromo.
James B. Pinker (you knew Pinker, the author’s
agent) handled the stuff. In the American phrase,
Pinker ‘grubstaked’ Conrad; and among long-term
investments of the very highest grade J. C. has been
one of the very best in the world. Ah, yes! He
has! No one who ever invested in Conrad and held
on, held ‘for the rise,’ has ever lost a penny—or
failed to make an enormous per cent. Why, take
Heinemann and F. N. D. They, in effect, bought
at away below par twenty-year bonds that matured
and were paid off at par. For after twenty years
J. C. picked up the all-but-finished novel, put it
through in triumphant fashion and gave it to them
under the title of The Rescue. By that time, he
was made. He was selling in America practically
seventeen times as many copies as when they put
their money in—maybe more. And any publisher
in America or England would, by then, have given
his upper and lower teeth to possess Conrad. The
Civil List was at liberty to take care of someone
else and lucky if it found another half so rewarding.
“Do I give the impression that this result was
brought about in the least meteorically? That would
be inexcusable on my part. Let me see: There were
Almayer’s Folly and An Outcast of the Islands and
The Nigger and Lord Jim and Nostromo and The
Secret Agent and Under Western Eyes. Seven
novels, not counting the two he wrote with Ford
Madox Hueffer and four or five books of short
stories. I am speaking now of the nineteen years
that lay between Conrad’s first book and his novel,
Chance; and I am avoiding all exaggeration when
I tell you flatly that in all those nineteen years not
one single book—not the succession of all those
books—made enough money for the reasonable
needs of himself and his family. Oh, I don’t say
that he was entirely dependent on these books and
the far-sightedness of men like those investors I
have mentioned. W. E. Henley serialised The
Nigger; in America, the North American Review
serialised Under Western Eyes; there was a bit of
money, now and again from the magazine sale of
one of the short-stories, no doubt. I stick to my
point: The income from the books was not enough.
By the way, he also wrote in those years the two
autobiographical books, The Mirror of the Sea and
A Personal Record. H’m. The American publishers
of A Personal Record printed it from type.
You know; print a few and throw the type away.
“Chance was published in 1914 and sold 20,000
copies in England and the long ordeal was over.
iv
“One ordeal, that is. Ordeals, as such, are never
over. After the trial by water, the trial by fire;
and you are not to suppose that because one has
survived the trial of the spirit he will therefore
triumph easily over the trials of the flesh. Not at
all. What is the malady of rheumatism beside the
torture of shyness? And Conrad has always been
distinctly shy. His American publisher, for a long
time, did not meet him; J. C. backed out of it, until,
finally, a perfectly reasonable impatience seized
upon Mr. Doubleday, who said to himself, in a mild
tone: ‘Confound it all. This sort of thing has
got to stop.’ And that sort of thing did stop. J. C.
at length was induced to come to a London hotel
and shake hands—about all he did do, in fact, for
at once a severe attack of shyness set in. For quite
a while that interview went—very badly? Goodness
knows it did not even go badly; it simply did
not go at all. But then, as he knew Conrad was
planning a new book, Mr. Doubleday asked a few
questions natural to a person who has something
at stake in a prospective venture. J. C. answered
with entire willingness, began explaining what he
had in mind and—pouf! Where was that shyness
any longer? They parted as very good friends and
have remained such ever since. So it came about
that at last J. C. visited America as the guest
of Mr. Doubleday. As you can imagine, lecture
bureaus, societies and every sort of outfit had been
after J. C. for years to speak in public. He had
always turned down such offers, but before coming
to America he explained to Mr. Doubleday that he
should like to tell a few people, not more than a
dozen, over the luncheon table of his Congo experience,
and then read to them from his story,
Heart of Darkness, the same affair as it came out
in fiction. ‘If I am able to interest those few,’ J. C.
went on, ‘perhaps I might try the same thing with
a larger number, say fifty or even a hundred; I
don’t think I could ever address more than a hundred.’
You see, he knew himself. He is the kind
of man who is at his best in an intimate surrounding.
Perhaps you have noticed the very special quality
of intimacy achieved in his stories under practically
all conditions. He inhabits other people’s breasts.
A self-conscious tendency as great as his own or
greater excites his friendly compassion. I know
an American novelist, at one time editor of an
American magazine and then in England meeting
people and questing material. Several people were
present but Conrad noticed the extreme ill-ease of
the American editor. J. C. got up and came over
and sat beside the stranger, who then lost some of
his discomfort and eventually plucked up enough
to say to J. C. that he would like to get some short
stories from him. ‘Ah! Short stories,’ J. C. commented
with that markedly foreign accent or intonation.
He paused. ‘I do not pick short stories out
of my sleeve.’ It was said with an inflection pleasantly
humorous that did not conceal the seriousness
of the fact. He simply wasn’t that kind of a conjuror.
This was not the editor who handled Victory.
American editors, according to my impression, are
a varied lot. The mixture they make is a literary
cocktail which appears to go to the heads of so
many American authors. I know an American
editor who bought a Conrad novel as a serial when
all his—confrères’?—had rejected the story because
of the impossible length. This man printed the
147,000 words without the sacrifice of one. This
was after Victory and as the editor in question knew
nothing of that case, his was an unconscious as well
as a vicarious atonement. But let that pass. We
are not concerned with American editors, and
neither, except momentarily, has Conrad been. His
preoccupation has been unbrokenly with the problem
of a sufficient self-knowledge. Must he not
know himself better than any other possibly could?
Of course, and for two imperative purposes: In the
first place to write, in the second place, to keep his
courage. It is no use being able to write unless you
can keep your courage. Too, the world is full of
brave souls who have bravery and ... nothing
else. No gift, I mean. Nothing in the world is so
cheap as courage, so common. But look you!—if a
man undertakes self-examination, his courage goes.
The scale of values is hopelessly deranged and either
the self rises to sublime heights of despair or sinks
into a hopeless, sticky complacency. J. C. is not an
unblemished exception to this general law, or deplorable
result—whichever term you prefer. He
had gone to revisit Poland and was there when the
Great War unleashed itself. The story of how he
got out of Europe has never been told and, in
fact, I don’t see how it can be. Or, well, why
not? What do a few bribes matter, in a good
cause? Some fairly influential persons, including
an American Ambassador, were called upon to extricate
Conrad from the extremely troublesome complications
caused by the fact that he, a Pole by
race and a Russian subject by birth, was a naturalised
Englishman. The American Ambassador, appointed
in the first place because of his large
personal means, enabling him to support an Ambassadorship
in the style to which it had been accustomed,
may have used his private pocketbook; but in
my judgment the matter was one to which he could
quite conscientiously have devoted the public funds.
Let that pass, too. They say that J. C. hates Russians
and is frequently irascible. He also understands
Russians, as any disbeliever may discover
by reading Under Western Eyes. As for his irascibility,
the results of self-examination justify any
reasonable amount of irritation. If it had been
one of you who had written seven-eighths of The
Rescue and found himself stuck for an ending I
daresay the detonations would have been terrific.
A volcano can blow its head off but an artist must
not be permitted to let a little steam escape! What
sort of a doctrine is that? J. C., of late years, has
lost a good deal of his nervousness. He has written
his Lord Jim long ago. He has accomplished the
most satisfactory definition we possess of the novel—where
he calls it ‘a conviction of our fellowmen’s
existence strong enough to take upon itself a form
of imagined life clearer than reality.’ I call your
attention to the last three words. If the ‘form of
imagined life’ is not clearer to us than life as we
observe it, there is no novel. Now, life is never
clear unless we hold a little fragment of it in front
of the mirror of each one of us, his own heart.
Always, then, something different from what we
expected is then clear, recognisable. J. C. has never
done anything else. The story of The Secret Sharer,
that chap who haunted the captain’s cabin and persisted
in the captain’s thoughts, is the symbol of all
Conrad’s work. I believe he has called it his favourite
story; does anyone need to ask why?
Giorgio Viola in Nostromo, Mrs. Gould in the same
novel, the nigger in the story of the Narcissus,
Haldin in Under Western Eyes, our friend, the
anarchist, in The Secret Agent; Captain MacWhirr
in Typhoon and Jim in Lord Jim; Axel Heyst in
Victory; Flora de Barral and others in Chance—you
know as well as I do that these are simply
persons we encounter and depreciate or else dismiss
as incomprehensible. But Conrad holds them up to
the mirror of his own heart and behold! they are
reflected in new shapes, pathetic shapes, heroic
shapes, twisted and tortured shapes, but shapes that
are unfailingly intelligible. It is not quite the same
thing as saying: ‘There, but for the grace of God,
goes Joseph Conrad.’ It is equivalent, perhaps, to
saying: ‘Here, by the grace of God, is the affinity
with Joseph Conrad.’ The meaning of the universe
is, as the Spaniards say, with God; but what we feel
about it is of perpetual fascination and very real
importance. J. C. has found that out, in the course
of a fairly long and extremely surprising lifetime.
The world is a ship that will never make port, it is
fair to assume, in our lifetimes; its exact position,
then, as witnessed to by the sun and the stars, is of
little moment. But those who are aboard—let us
have a clear understanding about them, if we can.
“To do that, one must feel the deck beneath his
feet, like that old fellow Peyrol, in Conrad’s newest
novel which you will so soon be reading. Coming
after The Rescue—how long it has been! Three
years after!—The Rover has surprised me with an
unexpected simplicity of strain, like a clear little
thread of blue in a riot of scarlet, the bright background
of Revolutionary France and Napoleon’s
day. Peyrol, I ought to tell you, was a French waif
whose sea exile led him to the coast of India and
to membership in the strange fraternity of pirates
who called themselves Brothers of the Coast. But
this was all before; we open upon the return of
Peyrol to France and an inconspicuous repose in a
little farmhouse where dwell an old woman, a bloodthirsty
scarecrow, and a young girl whose eyes, having
looked upon the spurting blood of the Terror,
can remain fixed on nothing for consecutive instants
since. And there’s a young French officer sent to
the farm on duty connected with the blockade. Far
down below the rim of the horizon, you understand,
sails the fleet commanded by Lord Nelson. The
complete affair is one of those episodes in which a
handful of people are wholly at the mercy of destiny
if a single one of them fails to sustain his illusion,
whether of love, of wrath, of mercy, of hope, or,
perhaps, of a sublime despair. Despair? Why,
certainly; from what other sentiment could old
Peyrol have acted as he did, in the grand emergency,
cutting the knot that bound up together those few
lives, whose only importance was the supreme
importance of the insignificant and humble? Peyrol,
the ex-pirate, flashing out over the water to
his final earthly adventure is the latest and most
beautiful incarnation of that old sailor whom Conrad
knew in the flesh and has translated so often—the
‘Ulysses’ we meet in The Mirror of the Sea,
who is also Nostromo, who appears under his actual
name and in his true rôle in The Arrow of Gold.
In the closing pages of The Rover we get a brief
glimpse of the great Nelson, but he does not dwarf
Peyrol.
“A Mediterranean story, a tale of that sea which
is ‘the charmer and deceiver of audacious men,’ like
Life itself, which also keeps ‘the secret of its
fascination.’”
v
Marlow ceased to speak. It was beautifully dark.
The river, in our stretch of it, was composed to the
beauty of that darkness and won to the felicity of
a nearly perfect silence. I can’t speak for the others,
of course. Personally I was absorbed in trying to
remember the man Conrad’s exact words—in the so
long suppressed preface to The Nigger. You must
have read them:
“The artist appeals to that part of our being that
is not dependent on wisdom; to that in us which is
a gift and not a mere acquisition—and, therefore,
more permanently enduring. He speaks to our
capacity for delight and wonder, to the sense of
mystery surrounding our lives; to our sense of pity,
and beauty, and pain: to the latent feeling of fellowship
with all creation—and to the subtle but
invincible conviction of solidarity that knits together
the loneliness of innumerable hearts, to the
solidarity in dreams, in joy, in sorrow, in aspirations,
in illusions, in hope, in fear, which binds men
to each other, which binds together all humanity—the
dead to the living and the living to the unborn.”
Books by Joseph Conrad
NOVELS:
1895 Almayer’s Folly
1896 An Outcast of the Islands
1898 The Nigger of the Narcissus [first published in America as The Children of the Sea]
1900 Lord Jim
1903 Nostromo
1907 The Secret Agent
1911 Under Western Eyes
1914 Chance
1915 Victory
1917 The Shadow Line: A Confession
1919 The Arrow of Gold
1920 The Rescue
1923 The Rover
NOVELS IN COLLABORATION WITH FORD MADOX
HUEFFER:
1901 The Inheritors: An Extravagant Story
1903 Romance
TALES AND SHORT STORIES:
1898 Tales of Unrest
1902 Youth: A Narrative; Heart of Darkness; The End of the Tether
1903 Typhoon and Other Stories [in America Typhoon is published separately and the volume is Folk and Other Stories]
1908 A Set of Six
1912 ’Twixt Land and Sea
1916 Within the Tides
AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL:
1906 The Mirror of the Sea: Memories and Impressions
1912 A Personal Record [published in England as Some Reminiscences]
CRITICAL:
1921 Notes on Life and Letters
Sources on Joseph Conrad
Joseph Conrad: His Romantic-Realism, by RUTH
M. STAUFFER (Boston: Four Seas Company, 1922).
This study of Conrad is of first importance because
of its thirty pages of appendices, consisting
of:
I. Conrad Bibliographies
II. Conrad’s Works
(A) Chronological List of Novels and
Tales (with Original Editions)
(B) Alphabetical List of Short Stories
(C) Miscellaneous Writings by Conrad
III. Criticisms of Conrad
(A) Books on Conrad. With a paragraph
of characterisation of each.
(B) Articles About Conrad. With notes
as to the character of each article.
There is given a “first,” a “second”
and a “third” list, according to the
estimate of an article’s value.
IV. Book Reviews. Described as a “partial list
only,” but recording fully 200 reviews in
principal English and American magazines
and newspapers.
V. Miscellaneous
(A) Brief Articles on the Personality of
Conrad
(B) Poems to Conrad
(C) A list of Portraits of Conrad
All of Conrad’s short stories are credited to their
respective volumes, serial publication is invariably
noted, etc.
Joseph Conrad—The Man, by Elbridge L. Adams,
in THE OUTLOOK for 18 April, 1923. One of the
most complete accounts of a visit and report of
the everyday Conrad.
The chapter on Joseph Conrad, by Leland Hall, in
English Literature During the Last Half Century,
by JOHN W. CUNLIFFE. The Macmillan
Company, revised edition, 1923.
Some Modern Novelists, by HELEN THOMAS FOLLETT
and WILSON FOLLETT. Henry Holt &
Company, 1918.
Joseph Conrad, A Study, by RICHARD CURLE. Doubleday,
Page & Company, 1914.
Private Information.
The reader may consult the references available in
the New York Public Library or the Library of
Congress, Washington, D. C, and should also consult
the annual READER’S GUIDE TO PERIODICAL LITERATURE
especially since 1914. He should also
consult the map showing the locations of Conrad’s
stories, printed as an end-paper in some editions of
his books, particularly Victory.
5. The Documents in the Case of Arthur Train
i
THE first and most important is a volume of over
two hundred pages—very large pages, somewhat
larger, in fact, than those of Cosmopolitan
magazine, a trifle smaller than those of Vanity Fair.
The volume is bound in heavy yellow paper which
says, in neat letters at the upper left, “Indictment
No. 1.” Inside the cover is a long table of contents;
the printed pages that follow are made either more
enlightening or more alarming, according to your
variety of intelligence, by the presence of charts
and diagrams. One such, when unfolded, shows
green, red and black inks. The purpose is to make
it easier for the eye to trace the intricate handlings
of certain considerable sums of money....
This mysterious book, possessed of no title-page
and honouring no one as its author, represents the
capacity of Arthur Train for hard work. In 1914
Henry Siegel, a New York merchant and banker,
was to be prosecuted, and Arthur Train was entrusted
with the prosecution. Counsel for Siegel
secured a change of venue and the trial was transferred
to Geneseo, New York. The case for the
prosecution, in its mathematical and extremely complicated
demonstration, seemed only too likely to be
lost before a jury of farmers completely unfamiliar
with Mr. Siegel’s affairs. Mr. Siegel was in banking
companies, merchandising corporations, realty
corporations, a securities company, an express company
and other enterprises. It was quite necessary
to explore the labyrinth; something like $50,000
was expended by Arthur Train, the explorer, and
the printed and bound book, Indictment No. 1, was
a mere preliminary to the battle in court.
In 1914 Arthur Train was already the author of
quite a number of books of fiction. In a general
way, they represented pleasant recreation.
ii
Other documents are these books and stories of
his, the work of leisure intervals and an active
imagination. Some of them were done by dictation,
dictation interrupted by telephone calls, by days in
court, by this or that or the other. He acquired
the faculty of dropping and picking up again in the
middle of a chapter, a paragraph, a sentence. He
didn’t worry over the stuff; he didn’t fuss about it,
as some men do about their golf, when they’re off
their game. The business of life was transacted in
the gloomy chambers of the Criminal Courts Building,
New York, where the air is bad, the light poor,
but the saturation with human nature, perfect. To
prepare a case was rather frequently interesting, to
try a case was scarcely ever without its thrill. And
the cases, despite the common misconception of
them, were not assorted East Side vendettas or
Chinatown murders. A large percentage of them
were always on that shadowy borderline where a
District Attorney must stop and ask himself if a
crime has been committed, if, after all, the remedy
is not to be sought in an action brought in the civil
courts. And every little while there would be a
case of proportions, of an almost inscrutable complexity,
like that which led to the publication (in a
strictly limited edition with a deluxity of coloured
inks) of Indictment No. 1.
ARTHUR TRAIN
Arthur Train is the most agreeable of men, not
tall, suave, exceedingly friendly, a good talker and
with all the requisite human approaches and contacts,
but if you really wish to make yourself tiresome
to him you can do it by suggesting that he is a
“criminal lawyer.” Now there have been and are
among “criminal lawyers” many men of eminence.
The defence of persons accused of crime is possibly
that branch of the law in which talent or genius
shows most conspicuously. As a matter of fact,
however, the most ingenious brains of the legal
profession have preferred, for a generation past, to
remain in offices and nurse the young and growing
corporation or correct the adult corporation’s errors
in diet and underwear. Corporation law is the thing
in our day and there is some very good evidence that
Arthur Train is an excellent corporation lawyer.
What about the evidence that he is a novelist?
Your Honours, I am coming to that directly.
iii
The document now to our purpose is his latest
novel, His Children’s Children. It represents Mr.
Train’s most serious work to date. To give it its
proper background of purpose, I should like to make
a literary comparison. My trouble is that any sort
of literary comparison seems to be extended too far.
If I compare one novel with another the impression
arises that I am comparing them in every respect.
I compare two books, and it is assumed that I am
comparing the two authors. Perhaps the two books
have a single resemblance and the authors both have
blue eyes. Very well, then! I was about to speak
of John Galsworthy’s work in The Forsyte Saga.
That history of a family is discussed elsewhere in
this book. My present point is that it is the history
of an English family whose main inheritance was
the property instinct, a blending of acquisitiveness
and tenaciousness, “to have and to hold.” Mr.
Train’s His Children’s Children is the history of an
American family whose main inheritance was a
most characteristically American one, the wish to
“get on.” Tenacity was strong in the Forsytes, it
is undeveloped in the Kaynes. A Forsyte has not
much to acquire, but a Kayne is always two up and
three to play; the effort to acquire is his breath and
he is somehow always afflicted with the feeling of
short-windedness. Each in his quite distinctive
way, these two novelists have concerned themselves
with the situation arising from an age of materialism—the
age that culminated in the Great War. I
choose my words. I do not say that the Great War
was a product of a materialistic age, though there is
a brief for that and I think quite possibly Mr. Train
would consent to argue it. But the Great War
did come in our age of a materialistic civilisation,
and, if not at the end of it, nearer to the end than
to the beginning. When did our materialistic age
begin? At the end of Mrs. Wharton’s Age of Innocence,
of course.
Mr. Train’s motif is the dominant characteristic
of an age we all lived in, and what that characteristic
led to. He writes, of course, about old Peter
B. Kayne, “The Pirate,” and his children and grandchildren;
these are the little group of people in the
immediate foreground. They are the larger world
in little, people who set the fashion and make the
pace, watched and aped by thousands. Their ambitions,
their discontents, their achievements in every
direction, including sensation, scandal and disgrace
are the best commentary on—themselves as individuals?
Not at all; on certain forces and tendencies
more powerful than they.
So considered, His Children’s Children is a perfectly
documented study of the third generation
since the beginning of the era of “big business” in
America. To the Forsytes the termination came
with a sign, “To Let.” With us it has more frequently
come with some such scene as that closing
Mr. Train’s able novel; I mean old Peter B. Kayne,
ill and helpless upstairs, and the auctioneer at his
stand below. To the once redoubtable Pirate comes
the sound of a rising murmur from down there; he
manages to get up and struggle feebly to a place
where he can look upon the alien affair going on in
the house—in his, Peter B. Kayne’s, house. The
auctioneer’s voice is lifted above the rest, in a louder
smoothness, in an accent of barter; ambitions and
ideals, so far as realised, are here knocked down to
the highest bidder. What price are we offered on
certain tangible results of a desire to get on? To
the highest bidder.... Perhaps, after all, Peter
B. Kayne’s was the high bid.
iv
A “documented” study; I chose my word there,
also. For an immense amount of work went into
His Children’s Children. You may take my word
for it, as much as went into the authorship of
Indictment No. 1. Or, no, you need not take my
word. Take a fact, instead. Mr. Train is now at
work upon a very remarkable novel of which it is
not my privilege to speak here except to say that
its first chapter exemplifies his infinitely painstaking
method to-day. In common with a very few other
novelists, he likes to derive clearly through several
antecedent generations his principal characters.
His writing undergoes many corrections but in his
first draft he gives himself full rein. In the novel
that is to follow His Children’s Children, he spent
much time on the first chapter. By a “cut-back” he
traced his hero’s family from about the year 1790
to the opening of the story, in the present. This,
mind you, was with the deliberate intention that
the first chapter should ultimately be of not much,
if any, more than ordinary chapter length—perhaps
thirty typewritten pages.
Well, he knew he had written a good deal, but
the first chapter, first draft, was written and he sent
it to be typed. The manuscript had been returned
to him on a day when I called; it made exactly 184
typewritten pages—about half the length of an
ordinary full-length novel, maybe somewhat more.
v
Arthur (Cheney) Train was born in Boston, 6
September 1875, the son of Charles Russell Train
and Sarah M. (Cheney) Train. His father was
Attorney-General of Massachusetts, 1873-1880.
Arthur Train was graduated from Harvard (A.B.)
in 1896 and received the law degree three years
later. In 1897 he married Ethel Kissam, daughter
of Benjamin P. Kissam, of New York. Mrs. Train,
also a writer, died in the spring of 1923. Her book,
“Son” and Other Stories of Childhood and Age is
being published posthumously.
Arthur Train went almost immediately into the
District Attorney’s office in New York. He never
entirely sacrificed his connection with it until 1916,
when he became a member of the firm of Perkins
& Train. As a special deputy Attorney-General of
the State of New York, in 1910, he brought about
the indictment of over one hundred persons, political
offenders in Queens County, in the city of New
York. He is a member of the Century, University
and Harvard Clubs of New York, and of the
Downtown Association. In his attractive home,
at 113 East Seventy-third street, New York, there
is a room, up one flight, occupying the whole width
of the front of the house, with southerly windows,
book-lined walls, an ample desk, and a roomy davenport
confronting a fireplace. The fireplace is fenced
about and the top of the fence is leather-cushioned,
making a comfortable seat. Nothing could be more
pleasant than to sink into the davenport and face
Mr. Train, who has seated himself on the fireplace
fence and lighted a cigarette.
“But don’t you mind the interruptions?” you ask
him. “Suppose you are in the middle of a novel and
a big case comes along——”
“That’s very refreshing,” he answers. “I come
back to the novel as from a vacation.”
And you recall the early writing, done, so to
speak, between telephone calls.
There has been a change; Mr. Train freely
acknowledges it. “I can’t say exactly when it occurred.
It was during the war. I felt differently
about my writing. I felt much more intent about it.
It took hold of me very strongly when I was writing
about Ephraim Tutt—Tutt and Mr. Tutt, you
know. I think those were possibly the first stories
I had written which made me feel emotion.”
It is easy to see why, easier, perhaps, in Mr.
Train’s new collection of these tales, Tut, Tut!
Mr. Tutt, than in the first book. For the emphasis
upon Ephraim Tutt’s attitude is more pronounced as
we see him deliberately employing the tricks of the
law in the interests of justice. Himself moved
by that most permanent of human emotions, the desire
for the just, and by that most continual of
human delights, the extraction of good from evil or
even good wreaked by means of evil, and moved
also by that human protest against the application
of general rules to individual dilemmas, Mr. Tutt
would be strange if he did not arouse in his creator
the emotion inseparable from any act of art.
Once felt, never without. The practise of law
seems less important than once it did to Arthur
Train. The number of cases that really are
interesting—are they growing fewer? There is
something about private practise ... duller than
the old court work, less stimulating....
He has “an infinite capacity for taking pains.”
It has been proven. There, I think, our case rests.
Books by Arthur Train
1905 McAllister and His Double
1906 The Prisoner at the Bar
1908 True Stories of Crime
1909 The Butler’s Story
1909 Mortmain
1909 Confessions of Artemas Quibble
1910 C. Q., or In the Wireless House
1911 Courts, Criminals and the Camorra
1914 The “Goldfish.” This book, published anonymously, caused a sensation by its satirisation of American social life
1915 The Man Who Rocked the Earth (with Robert Williams Wood)
1917 The World and Thomas Kelly
1918 The Earthquake
1920 Tutt and Mr. Tutt
1921 By Advice of Counsel
1921 The Hermit of Turkey Hollow
1923 His Children’s Children
1923 Tut, Tut! Mr. Tutt
6. The Lady of a Tradition, Miss Sackville-West
i
THERE are two sides from which you may first
profitably look at the house. One is from the
park, the north side. From here the pile shows best
the vastness of its size; it looks like a mediæval
village. It is heaped with no attempt at symmetry;
it is sombre and frowning; the grey towers rise; the
battlements cut out their square regularity against
the sky; the buttresses of the old twelfth-century
tithe-barn give a rough impression of fortifications.
There is a line of trees in one of the inner courtyards,
and their green heads show above the roofs
of the old breweries; but although they are actually
trees of a considerable size they are dwarfed and
unnoticeable against the mass of the buildings
blocked behind them. The whole pile soars to a
peak which is the clock-tower with its pointed roof;
it might be the spire of the church on the summit
of the hill crowning the mediæval village. At sunset
I have seen the silhouette of the great building
stand dead black on a red sky; on moonlight nights
it stands black and silent, with glinting windows,
like an enchanted castle. On misty autumn nights
I have seen it emerging partially from the trails of
vapour, and heard the lonely roar of the red deer
roaming under the walls.”
V. SACKVILLE-WEST
Such is the opening page of V. Sackville-West’s
volume, Knole and the Sackvilles, a handsomely
printed and illustrated account of the seat of the
Earls and Dukes of Dorset. Authentic record of
the family goes not beyond that Herbrand de Sackville
who came to England with William the Conqueror.
Knole, bought by Archbishop Bourchier
in 1456, and held by Cardinal Morton, Cranmer,
Henry VIII., Edward VI., Queen Mary and Elizabeth,
was granted, in 1586 by Elizabeth, to Thomas
Sackville, Lord Buckhurst, first Earl of Dorset.
The name “West” enters with the marriage of Lady
Elizabeth Sackville, sister of the fourth Duke, to
John West, Earl de la Warr.
The house, of seven courts to correspond with
the days of the week, fifty-two staircases matching
the weeks of the year and 365 rooms answering to
the days of the year[1] “is gentle and venerable. It
has the deep inward gaiety of some very old woman
who has always been beautiful, who has had many
lovers and seen many generations come and go,
smiled wisely over their sorrows and their joys, and
learnt an imperishable secret of tolerance and
humour. It is, above all, an English house.” The
garden side is the gay, the princely side. When, in
summer, the great oak doors of the second gatehouse
were left open, “it has sometimes happened
that I have found a stag in the banqueting hall,
puzzled but still dignified, strayed in from the park
since no barrier checked him.”
[1] “I cannot truthfully say,” writes Miss Sackville-West in
Knole and the Sackvilles, “that I have ever verified these counts,
and it may be that their accuracy is accepted solely on the strength
of the legend; but, if this is so, then it has been a very persistent
legend, and I prefer to sympathise with the amusement of the
ultimate architect on making the discovery that by a judicious
juggling with his additions he could bring courts, stairs and rooms
up to that satisfactory total.”
ii
In 1825 the duchess Arabella Diana died and her
estate devolved upon her two daughters, Mary and
Elizabeth. Elizabeth, as has been told, became the
wife of Lord de la Warr. Dying in 1870 she left
Buckhurst to her elder sons and Knole to her
younger sons, one of whom was Miss Sackville-West’s
grandfather. He was eighty and she perhaps
eight, and as he shared “the family failing of
unsociability” it fell to the child’s lot to show the
house to visitors. In this, as in more natural ways,
she became highly familiar with Knole and from her
earliest years must have loved the place. On receipt
of a telegram that people were coming, Grandpapa
would take the next train for London, “returning
in the evening when the coast was clear.” The Cartoon
Gallery, the Leicester Gallery, the Brown Gallery;
Lady Betty Germaine’s bedchamber; the three
principal bedrooms, the Spangled Room, the Venetian
Ambassador’s and the King’s chamber, “the
only vulgar room in the house” with furniture made
entirely in silver and articles of silver, “even to a
little eye-bath”—the procession of the days and
years was not more certain than the procession
of the curious, the inquisitive and the wonder-struck
through these. You will fashion your own
picture of the daughter of the Sackvilles standing
before the portrait of Lady Margaret Sackville
(over the fireplace in Lady Betty Germaine’s sitting
room) and endeavouring, quite vainly, to do her own
hair in the elaborate manner of young Lady Margaret’s.
Or, it may be, she had been naughty that
day, and had hid herself inside the pulpit of the
Chapel of the Archbishops, where, in spite of private
steps leading out of her bedroom straight into
the Family Pew, “they never found me.” Grandpapa
was “a queer and silent old man,” as Miss
Sackville-West remembers him. “He knew nothing
whatever about the works of art in the house; he
spent hours gazing at the flowers, followed about
the garden by two grave demoiselle cranes....
He and I, who so often shared the house alone between
us, were companions in a shy and undemonstrative
way. Although he had nothing to say to
his unfortunate guests, he could understand a child....
When we were at Knole alone together I used
to go down to his sitting-room in the evening to
play draughts with him—and never knew whether
I played to please him, or he played to please me—and
sometimes, very rarely, he told me stories of
when he was a small boy, and played with the rocking-horse,
and of the journeys by coach with his
father and mother from Buckhurst to Knole or from
Knole to London; of their taking the silver with
them under the seat; of their having outriders with
pistols; and of his father and mother never addressing
each other, in their children’s presence, as anything
but ‘my Lord’ and ‘my Lady.’ I clasped my
knees and stared at him when he told me these stories
of an age which already seemed so remote, and his
pale blue eyes gazed away into the past, and suddenly
his shyness would return to him and the clock
in the corner would begin to wheeze in preparation
to striking the hour, and he would say that it was
time for me to go to bed....”
iii
At the age of thirteen Miss Sackville-West wrote
“an enormous novel” about the figure of Edward
Sackville, fourth Earl of Dorset, who seemed to her
the embodiment of Cavalier romance. And perhaps
he was. “He had the advantage of starting with
the Vandyck portrait in the hall, the flame-coloured
doublet, the blue Garter, the characteristic swaggering
attitude, the sword, the love-locks, the key
of office painted dangling from his hip and the
actual key dangling on a ribbon from the frame of
the picture.” The dashing career of this follower
of King Charles, who fought a duel with Lord
Bruce and whose younger son was murdered by the
Roundheads, became “a source of rich romance to a
youthful imagination nourished on Cyrano and The
Three Musketeers.” The half-grown girl re-examined
certain old nail-studded trunks in the attics, mute
witnesses to Cromwellian violence, some of them
curved to fit the roof of a barouche. “The battered
trunks were stacked near the entrance to the hiding-place,
which, without the smallest justification save
an old candlestick and a rope-ladder found therein,
I peopled with the fugitive figures of priests and
Royalists. I peeped into the trunks: they contained
only a dusty jumble of broken ironwork, some old
books, some bits of hairy plaster fallen from the
ceiling, some numbers of Punch for 1850. Nevertheless,
there were the gaping holes where the locks
had been prised off the trunks, and the lid forced
back upon the hinges by an impatient hand. Down
in the Poets’ Parlour, where I lunched with my
grandfather, taciturn unless he happened to crack
one of his little stock-in-trade of jokes, Cromwell’s
soldiers had held their Court of Sequestration. The
Guard Room was empty of arms or armour, save for
a few pikes and halberds, because Cromwell’s soldiers
had taken all the armour away. The past
mingled with the present in constant reminder; and
out in the summer-house, after luncheon, with the
bees blundering among the flowers of the Sunk
Garden and the dragon-flies flashing over the pond,
I returned to the immense ledger in which I was
writing my novel, while Grandpapa retired to his
little sitting-room and whittled paper-knives from
the lids of cigar-boxes, and thought about—Heaven
knows what he thought about.”
iv
Miss Sackville-West is writing of Knole, of
course, in her long story called The Heir. The
manor of Blackboys with its peacocks is not Knole;
I suppose no one makes the mistake of literal identification
of people and places in fiction; at least,
none should do so. What is truly identifiable is
never anything tangible at all; it is merely an
emotion. When we read The Heir, subtitled “A
Love Story,” and acquaint ourselves in a leisurely
sufficience with the fellow Chase we should be stupid
indeed if we grasped at the substance and neglected
the shadow. It is shadow and its correspondent
sunlight for which, after all, mankind lives a life
wherein the things of substance are the final
unreality....
But her first book, which was brought to the
attention of the American publisher by Hugh
Walpole, was a novel called Heritage, an unusual
story of young lovers. The breath of distinction
upon the tale more than redeemed its faults of construction,
of which, perhaps, after all, the most
serious was merely the device of a letter immensely
longer than any epistle probable to be written.
Then, in point of publication, at least, came The
Dragon in Shallow Waters, also a novel. Some
two years elapsed before the appearance of her third
novel, Challenge, a piece of work of such a character
as to demand our earnest scrutiny. Challenge is
being followed by Grey Wethers and The Heir.
I have been speaking of American publication;
in England Miss Sackville-West first came to notice
as a poet. Her Poems of West and East was followed
by another collection called Orchard and
Vineyard. Her work in verse exhibited austerity
of expression joined to an emotional and descriptive
power difficult to appraise. Although it may be,
as has been said, that the chief use of poetry, written
when one is young, is to produce a finer prose when
one is older.
Of The Heir it is best to say little since a few
betraying words can so easily spoil its secret for
the reader. In the same volume appear The Christmas
Party, Patience, Her Son and The Parrot, a
vignette dedicated to “H. G. N.” All the qualities
present in The Heir may be found in the other
tales, so varyingly shorter—delicacy, precision, dramatic
power and a perception of beauty translated
almost without the use of a single emotional word.
In The Christmas Party we have the deferred revenge
of a woman, a theatrical costumer, upon her
strait-minded family; Patience is an elderly man’s
recollection, in perfectly domesticated surroundings,
of his youthful affair; Her Son is the inevitable
cruelty inflicted upon a mother by the passage of
the years; the story of The Parrot points to the
only escape from the ... cage.
The “H. G. N.” of its dedication is the Honourable
Harold G. Nicolson. Except as an author,
the lady of Knole is no longer Victoria Sackville-West
but the Honourable Mrs. Harold G. Nicolson.
v
Challenge, a novel that may instructively be
compared with Joseph Conrad’s Nostromo, had the
curious fortune to be published first in America
and—what is more remarkable—only in America.
It might seem altogether extraordinary that one of
the most noteworthy novels by an Englishwoman
in years should not only not be published first in
England but should not be published there at all.
It might seem very extraordinary; and it is. The
circumstances were perhaps without a precedent
and, it may be hoped, will be without a duplication.
In 1920 an English publisher had accepted Challenge
and prepared it for issuance. That is to say,
type had been set, plates had been cast, the sheets
of the novel had been printed, folded and sewed.
Nothing remained but to encase them in cloth—a
matter of a week, usually—when the book would
be ready to go on sale. It was the eleventh hour;
11.59 to be precise. Then fate intervened.
It transpired (or was allowed to transpire) that
Miss Sackville-West had written her novel about
an actual family, portraying that family in general
and possibly in particular. The family was part
of her own, or shall we say, connected with her
own; and it was not without influence. This influence
was immediately exerted to secure the suppression
of Challenge. How far the influence
succeeded, by virtue of its own force and considerations,
and how far it was aided by the peculiarity
of the English libel law, which recognises technical
libel, I am unable to say; but succeed it did. Challenge
remained unbound and the English house
either put it down as a loss or, with a sanguineness
born of much publishing experience, carried it in
its inventory. There were all those folded and
sewed sheets constituting a very fair-sized edition,
as English editions go, packed away in some
sufficiently dry place. At Knole and in Cornwall
and it may be in other places Miss Sackville-West
continued writing.
Probably the only challenge to the suppressors
of the novel in England lay in the single figurative
word of the title. Miss Sackville-West could be
said to be writing of the actual family only in the
same sense that we can say, in alluding to the manor
of Blackboys in The Heir, that she writes of Knole.
Some South American republic, indeed, any South
American republic, would be equally justified in
beginning suit for libel against Conrad for the picture
of Costaguana in Nostromo—could a court be
discovered in which such a suit would be justiciable?
It is charitable to suppose that the suppressors
beheld themselves mirrored in the pages of Challenge
because they were victims of a narcism complex.
However, the interesting disabilities of these
people were of no serious importance on this side
of the Atlantic; Miss Sackville-West had done no
work of such importance as the unborn Challenge;
and after all those unbound sheets had lain untouched
for two years or longer the day came when
an American publisher took the whole lot, together
with the plates to enable him to print more, and
Challenge saw the light in the United States early
in 1923.
It is still unpublishable in England and seems
destined indefinitely to remain so. Not indignation
nor ridicule is likely to alter this state of affairs,
since the prototypes of Miss Sackville-West’s Davenants
must be conceived of as resembling Galsworthy’s
Forsytes in one respect: They are almost
certainly impervious to the wrath or derision of any
except their own kind, and this will hardly be
forthcoming.
Challenge, admirable in its technique, begins with
an epilogue, giving us through the eyes of disinterested
bystanders a glimpse of Julian Davenant
many years afterward. We see him with his wife
at a great affair in London. He has power, wealth,
distinction; and his wife is perfectly equipped for
her rôle. Many people expect that Davenant will
be the next Viceroy; he has already been in the
Cabinet. A cynical man, who believes in nothing—and
a philanthropist, really. His face, or his
eyes, give one the impression that he has “learnt all
the sorrow of the world”; they are inexpressibly
weary. And the two onlookers, a man and a
woman, recall that there was some “crazy adventure”
in Julian Davenant’s youth. “Very romantic,
but we all start by being romantic until we have
outgrown it.”
The three parts which follow narrate in a strictly
chronological order the details of that “crazy adventure.”
Julian Davenant was the young son
of a house of English Levantines, that is to say, an
English family established for several generations
in the Levant and possessing, at the time of the
story, besides much land, the site of valuable vineyards,
prestige and influence and political power.
It will be recalled that the Goulds of Costaguana
in Nostromo constituted a similar clan. Such
English exoterics (not to say exotics) are only moderately
rare. It is not proper to speak of them as
hybrids, since in their marriages they are careful
to avoid a non-English admixture and their sons
are invariably sent to England for their education.
Without in any essential degree sacrificing a single
one of those peculiarly tenacious English traits of
character and without any alteration of the English
habit of thought, they are in most other matters
assimilated to the country of their holdings. They
come to understand it, its ways, its habit of thought
and policy of conduct and instinct of behaviour with
a completeness that amounts to perfection and reposes,
as a rule and deep down, on a sincere distaste.
They are really marvellous, whether Goulds in
South America or Davenants in Greece. And their
young men....
In any comparison of Nostromo and Challenge it
will be found that the most obvious likenesses are
purely superficial. In Nostromo we have the son,
Charles Gould, determined to avenge, by a patient
commercialism and a silent political sagacity, the
fate of his Uncle Harry and the killing worry of
his father; the instrumentality to his hand is the
silver of the mine. In Challenge young Julian
Davenant is the victim of the romantic impulse
which causes him to respond, at any cost, to the
patriotic appeal of the Islands lying off the coast
and unwillingly a part of the tiny republic of
Herakleion. The girl, Eve, and the woman, Kato,
a native of the Islands and a famous singer, are the
personal contending forces in the struggle over
Julian Davenant. Eve is Julian’s cousin. In the
developing story of her love for Julian, in its culminating
struggle and final disaster a precise comparison
with Nostromo—even in respect of the
tragedy that befell Linda Viola—is a waste of our
attention.
vi
What may profitably be compared in Mr. Conrad’s
acknowledged masterpiece and Miss Sackville-West’s
dramatic novel is the identity of method
and art. I say “identity” without any hesitation,
for in both cases I think the artist has achieved a
proportionately impressive and living and beautiful
result. As to method, the reader will observe for
himself that either novel might have been written
by either author. In each case the actual knowledge
of a totally foreign country is perhaps the same, and
in neither case is it very great or very important.
Again, in each case, the imaginative creation is on
a plane so much above the level attained in other
(and very excellent) novels that the book must
definitely be set in a class apart. One accounts for
the intense imaginative insight of The Old Wives’
Tale and My Antonia (to choose two especially fine
examples) by saying that, after all, both Arnold
Bennett and Willa Cather had the immeasurable
aid of childhood’s unblunted perceptiveness; and in
so partially accounting for the sheer fact, one does
quite rightly. But neither memory nor the deepest
well of sympathy serves to explain Nostromo and
Challenge; in these two novels the imagination had
to create something de novo and actively body it
forth; memories, hearsay, would be an actual
interference and the existence of an outer world a
positive interruption. They are both novels of a
perfectly valid idea recreated in terms of the subconscious
personality. If that is too cloudy an explanation
I will ask you to think of the subconscious
mind as a happily benevolent oyster, of the germ-idea
as an infinitesimal particle of irritant sand, and
of the accomplished story as the resulting pearl. It
is as near as I can come to conveying what I mean
... and know to be at least subjectively true.
Abandoning this difficult region and ascending
to the surface on which most art and literary method
lies, the comparison becomes so easy that one feels
superfluous in making it. Have we not the same
complexity of persons presented in an intimate
relation to each other and composing a little world,
complete socially, politically and in their attitudes;
so that we can perfectly conceive them in any set
of circumstances? Have we not also an atmosphere
resulting from a multitude of impalpable small
touches? Is not the effect in each case more exact
than any impression to be derived from personal
familiarity with either South America or Greece?
Is not the same impersonal viewpoint present? the
same astringent humour in evidence in its application
to the incongruities of the life presented? In both
cases the avoidance of any expression of emotion,
the final austerity of the highest art, exercises an
effect out of all predictable proportion on the
emotions of the reader. He is led to feel amusement,
ridicule, sympathy, indignation, dismay,
horror and grief; because never is it intimated to
him that it is his duty to feel any of these things.
vii
The new novel, Grey Wethers, taking its name
from those ancient sacrificial stones of the Druids
which are the symbols of the story, traces back in
substance to Miss Sackville-West’s Heritage, but is
free from the faults of construction which made her
first novel so unsatisfactory. The fineness of her
hand upon this more familiar material is the delicate
reward for her incessant painstaking. She is
not a person to rest satisfied, but an artist. An
artist....
“What was the promise of that mediocre ease
beside the certainty of these exquisite privations?”
So Chase questioned himself, in Miss Sackville-West’s
story of The Heir. “What was that drudgery
beside this beauty, this pride, this Quixotism?”
There is only one answer. If you would be an
artist you do not even bother with the answer. But
your heart leaps.
Books by V. Sackville-West
Poems of West and East [in England]
1921 Orchard and Vineyard [in England]
1918 Heritage
1920 The Dragon in Shallow Waters
1923 Knole and the Sackvilles
1923 Challenge [withdrawn in England prior to publication, 1920]
1923 Grey Wethers
1924 The Heir and Other Stories
Sources on V. Sackville-West
Knole and the Sackvilles, generally, and also pages 11, 17, 68, 82, 83, 219 and 220 Who’s Who [in England]
Private Information
7. Harold Bell Wright
i
FROM Who’s Who in America, 1922-1923 (Volume
12):
“WRIGHT, HAROLD BELL, author: born, Rome,
Oneida County, New York, May 4, 1872; son,
William A. Wright and Alma T. (Watson) Wright;
student two years, preparatory department, Hiram
College, Ohio; married, Frances E. Long, of
Buffalo, New York, July 18, 1899; married, second,
Mrs. Winifred Mary Potter Duncan, of Los
Angeles, California, August 5, 1920. Painter and
decorator, 1887-92; landscape painter, 1892-7;
pastor, Christian (Disciples) Church, Pierce City,
Missouri, 1897-8, Pittsburg, Kansas, 1898-1903,
Forest Avenue Church, Kansas City, Missouri,
1903-5, Lebanon, Missouri, 1905-7, Redlands,
California, 1907-8; retired from ministry, 1908.
Author: That Printer of Udell’s, 1903; The Shepherd
of the Hills, 1907; The Calling of Dan
Matthews, 1909; The Uncrowned King, 1910;
The Winning of Barbara Worth, 1911; Their Yesterdays,
1912; The Eyes of the World, 1914; When
A Man’s a Man, 1916; The Re-Creation of Brian
Kent, 1919; Helen of the Old House, 1921.
Home: Tucson, Arizona.”
Such is the outline derived by the compilers of
an invaluable work of reference whose method is
to ask of the individual certain standard questions
which he may answer in his discretion and which
he may supplement—in the editor’s discretion—by
further information about himself. The latitude
allowed in such a work as Who’s Who in America,
is necessarily rather small; it would, however, have
permitted Mr. Wright to say that the sales of his
fiction exceed those of any other living American
writer—perhaps those of any other living writer
anywhere. He did not say it. The impression
given by the words “landscape painter” may be
misleading, for Mr. Wright at that time made his
living by sign painting and house painting; but
also he made sketches and water colors which he sold
as he went along. Let this tiny matter be as a
warning that, on his own terms and in his own
fashion of speech, Harold Bell Wright is to be
taken literally.
HAROLD BELL WRIGHT
Always! Is there metaphor in his writing?
Was there metaphor in Pilgrim’s Progress? Are
there parables in the Bible? Do sermons contain
allegories? We know that allegories embody sermons.
Mr. Wright has never concealed the purpose
behind his novels, stories. It is to say plainly some
word that he believes will be of help, if uttered, to
men and women. In his strange personal history
lies the seed of a novel more absorbing, if less
credible, than any he has written. The poor boy,
the boy left motherless at ten, the man out of work,
the man with an empty stomach and no means of
filling it, the man who has been told that “the rock
pile was intended for fellows like you!”—and
through it all the sleazy thread of ill-health, down-right
sickness, and the bright scarlet stain of disease....
Two years at a little college, cut short by
illness; two years financed by hard work and ground
down in disappointment. Then the haphazard
wandering, the tramping afoot outdoors, the small
painting jobs, the inability to find work at times,
the hardships of climate—and at last he finds himself
in the Ozark Mountains looking for ...
what? For the chance to live, first of all. It was
there that he preached his first sermon, and there
he found a background and a setting for some of
the stories he was eventually to write. They were
very far off, then, those stories, below the horizon,
out of sight as were so many other things that were
to dawn on his life when he should be thirty.
ii
In any consideration of Harold Bell Wright as
an author, the usual approaches are of no value,
and not only of no value but so without meaning
as to be absurd. Almost he raises the fundamental
question: What is an author, anyway? Of course
the word does apply to all whose writing achieves
publication, especially as a book or books; and
perhaps it may be used of a person who remains
unpublished. But, as always, there is here a meaning
within a meaning; the word generally carries
with it some suggestion of literary skill or a pretension
thereto—as “doctor” implies a medical
training, or “lawyer” admission to practise at the
bar. However, Mr. Wright neither possesses any
literary skill nor ever pretended to have any, comparatively
speaking. He has more than once uttered
an emphatic disclaimer, but like other very
popular writers his sensitiveness to adverse criticism
is keen.
He is a moralist, a fabulist, a preacher of sermons,
a Sayer, and an Utterer. There is in the
impoverished English language no word for his rôle.
The English language, so full of words for things
that do not exist, has none for this type of man
who has always existed among the English-speaking
peoples though rather sparsely among other peoples.
When forced to recognise his existence as a power
for evil in politics, we borrow the word demagogue;
if his activity is rather indefinitely “religious,” we
affix the word evangelist. There is a common factor
in John Bunyan, Theodore Roosevelt, James
Whitcomb Riley, Harold Bell Wright easily recognised
in whatever field it operates. In the case of
Mr. Wright, it has been said that he appeals “to
the thousands upon thousands who crave to see
their humble doings, their paper fantasies exalted
and made memorable in the bright guise of a seeming
romance.” Unfortunately for the success of
this diagnosis, it is not the great masses of mankind
who are sentimental, but the minority who have
accustomed themselves to the contemplation of
mankind in great masses. If Mr. Roosevelt had
addressed himself to the “thousands upon thousands”
he would have been almost without influence;
and Mr. Riley’s verses are most noteworthy
for their intimate personal appeal. Such a Sayer
as Walt Whitman, speaking to men en masse, receives
from men small attention. One can neither
speak, write, paint, carve or build for the thousands;
one must do it for the individual every time.
In a short study of Roosevelt some years ago the
editor of the Atlantic Monthly, Ellery Sedgwick,
admirably indicated Roosevelt’s real achievement,
which was—not that he moulded national policies
but that he made the homegoing day labourer,
sitting in a trolley car, his empty lunch pail beside
him, trace with a stubby forefinger in the evening
newspaper the simple precept for that day, whether
a command against race suicide or a “Don’t flinch!
Don’t foul! Hit the line hard!” He who would
speak to many men and women must always address
each one; he must not make the mistake of appealing
to a lowest common intelligence and he must
perfectly understand that what is called “sentimentality”
is not a weakness but a sign of health—pink
thoughts like pink cheeks.
iii
“She stood before him in all the beautiful
strength of her young womanhood.”
“He was really a fine looking young man with
the appearance of being exceptionally well-bred
and well-kept. Indeed the most casual of observers
would not have hesitated to pronounce him a thoroughbred
and a good individual of the best type
that the race has produced....”
These sentences, from Wright’s novel, The
Winning of Barbara Worth, have been quoted
with the comment that Wright himself is that casual
observer and that, to the more thoughtful, Abraham
Lincoln, who “was anything but a thoroughbred,
anything but well-kept” is the best type of individual
that the race has produced. Mr. Wright
could crushingly reply that Lincoln was not a type;
but the failure in perception goes much deeper. The
critic of the passage quoted must know very well
that the respect of mankind for appearances is well-founded.
Appearances can be arrived at and kept
up, being thus one of the few things definitely
within our powers of accomplishment and control;
for what lies under the appearance may be beyond
our power to make or change. It is not instinct,
or even reason, but a solid regard for fact that
prizes appearance. Further, in the affair in question,
two subjects for a possible mating, the usual
man or woman is as unromantic and unsentimental
as possible in his or her satisfaction at the good looks
of hero and heroine. Those good looks and good
manners are something to go upon. Each has an
asset with the other and there is some chance for
the children, if any. Only a dangerous sentimentalist
would wish the man to be a mongrel. Mr.
Wright knows all this; so do we all of us; why,
then, is he called a sentimentalist?
Because, I suppose, an inveterate tradition of the
minority brands the majority as sentimental. Were
they so, they could not live. The majority, not
being victims of self-delusion, go through life, eating,
sleeping, working and feeling. The capacity
to feel has not in them been weakened. They may
be robbed of their cheeks’ pinkness, but it is more
difficult to take away the pinkness of their thoughts
(the mere mental accompaniments of their feelings).
Indeed, it has so far proved impossible to
enslave them by any intellectual system, as they
have been enslaved by this or that economic system.
If it were possible to persuade these men and women
that physical mongrelism should take the place of
Mr. Wright’s hero’s thoroughbreeding, the world
would have become sentimental with a vengeance
likely to recoil on the heads of those who wrought
the persuasion. The French Revolution would be
as nothing to the new era then dawning.
In other words, the young man used to advertise
linen collars (and Mr. Wright, at the young man’s
age, might easily have served as the model) is the
people’s proper hero. He represents, to a considerable
extent, something within the average power
to become. No more suggestive antithesis can be
imagined than between a novel like The Shepherd
of the Hills and such a work of fiction as Mr.
Sinclair Lewis’s Main Street, crammed with the
things beyond the average power to alter. It is
the interesting inevitability of the visitor to humble
homes in out of the way American places to encounter,
on the parlour table or its equivalent, a
Bible, a “gift” edition of Longfellow’s Poems, The
Wreck of the “Titanic” (with complete horrors,
last words of all on board, and full text of “Nearer,
My God, to Thee,” as played by the ship’s band)
and a copy of The Shepherd of the Hills, or, perhaps,
When a Man’s a Man. But Main Street?
That, if it was ever in the house, has gone the way of
all wood pulp very quickly. For these people have
none of that difficulty experienced by the literary
critic in distinguishing books, and their applied
canons are not matters of taste or sentiment or
intellectual theory, but principles of living as they
are compelled to practise them daily, personal and
intimate, directed toward the best appearance, unsentimental,
unintellectual, individual, healthful,
sensibly ambitious, emotionally direct and ...
free.
iv
Suppose, instead of audibly deploring Mr.
Wright, and uttering in their assaults upon him
an unconscionable amount of twaddle, the literary
critics were to transform themselves into students
of the popular psychology. In such case they would
see at once how the usual person unsentimentally
proceeds through life with the assistance of attainable
ideals. Of course, definitions of sentimentality
may and do differ. My idea here is simply that to
espouse the shadowy ideal is to come much more
under the charge of being sentimental than to aspire
to wear the newest style of linen collar, or acquire
good manners. I think at once, too, of a writer
whose best work meets the severe tests applied by
the critic of literature, Mr. Arnold Bennett. What
is The Old Wives’ Tale, what is Clayhanger, each
a work of accepted art, but a faithful transcription
of the average person’s utter unsentimentality and
complete devotion to the attainable ideal? Mr.
Bennett made the same veracious observation as
Mr. Wright makes; it is only the presentation that
is different—objective in the case of Bennett, immersed
in the case of Wright. For Bennett’s purpose
literary art is essential, for Wright’s, literary
art is a handicap. Moreover, the identification is
unlike. The people Bennett writes about, with the
exception of Clayhanger, would not recognise themselves
in his two novels; the people of Mr. Wright,
would. Why? Because Wright expresses them
in their own fractions—known to themselves. Bennett
carries them out to a decimal repetend—·142857142857142857
and so on, instead of ⅐,
subscribed by Mr. Wright. Virtue, vice, greed,
ambition, youth and the like are the simple fractions
in which Mr. Wright’s characters are stated. Whatever
realities these names represent, it had better
be realised that they are in themselves the simplest,
most necessary conventions. And as such, and as
such only, has Wright used them.
His method of work was, I think, the innocent
source of the general misunderstanding surrounding
him in the discussions of the minority. It is well-known
that before writing a novel he prepares a
short argument, as other writers prepare an outline
or plot. “The system I use,” he has explained,
“may have been used for centuries, or it may be
no one else has ever used it. I have wondered
whether it is old or new. Whichever it may be,
here it is: When I start to write a novel, the first
thing I do is to figure out why I am going to write
it. Not what is the story, but why? I mull this
over a while, and when it is pretty straight in my
mind, I write out an argument. No suggestion of
plot, you see. No incidents, scenes, location, nothing
done at first except the argument, but it is the
heart and soul of the novel. The novel is merely
this argument presented through the medium of
characters, plot, incidents, and the other properties
of the story. Next come the characters, each standing
for some element or factor in the argument. Up
to the last copying of The Eyes of the World, not
a character had been named. They were called in
the copy, Greed, Ambition, Youth, or whatever they
represented to me in the writing of the story.”
This simple explanation has been derided by asserting
that “Mr. Wright seeks to prove some abstract
notion of his own concerning good and evil
by means of a picked assembly of human beings.”
But how so? They are not picked human beings
at all, but like Bunyan’s characters, expressions of
the One. They prove nothing and are intended to
prove nothing, being merely expository, fabulous,
moralistic, and the natural presentation of no easy
notion but some familiar fact—far from abstract!
Take The Re-Creation of Brian Kent, one of
Wright’s least satisfactory books to its author and
to many readers and released by Wright with great
reluctance. An abstract notion is the last thing in
the world it touches upon; all is simple, vivid,
commonplace, centred around the actuality that,
with another chance, many a man can set his life
straight.
If there is any shortcoming it arises from
Wright’s personal strength. The man who can do
what he has done, persistently fighting tuberculosis,
risking public opinion in several matters and adhering
to his method in spite of a great change of personal
attitude and a personal revolution in ideas—that
man is no weakling. It would be interesting
to survey the personal change in Mr. Wright but
as it nowhere extrudes in his work, there is no
justification for an inquest. But the very circumstance
has its positive value in establishing him
for what he is not, namely, an artist. But there is
another aspect of Mr. Wright as phenomenon (not
as person) and his success cannot be understood
without examining that aspect.
v
Wright’s boyhood, to the age of ten when he lost
her, was focussed about the personality of his
mother. When she died he lost, if not perhaps
his only friend, his strongest. Before he could read
she had told him the Hiawatha legends, had read
aloud to him the stories of the Bible (the King
James version), had retold Shakespeare for him.
Her death made him clutch to his heart these books,
as well as the Pilgrim’s Progress and the portions
of Ruskin they had read and re-read together in the
home—which, by the way, was really at Wrightstown,
just outside Rome, New York, though
Wright’s birthplace is spoken of as “Rome.” A
feeling that these books of his mother’s were as
sacred books was fixed in the boy’s mind. Wright
has never ceased to read them, nor to try to pour
himself into those molds; and in conversation he
sometimes lets slip a phrase from one of them.
Without literary aptitude and with a very ragged
species of formal education, he speaks in his extraordinary
fashion and the millions hearken. So
much so that his success from the outset may be said
to have entirely reconstructed—for the purpose of
merchandising his books—the retail machinery of
book-selling.
The author of That Printer of Udell’s had the
means of reaching the folks in little villages and
on isolated farms, people who could scarcely be
reached by any of the books ordinarily being published.
The very inadequate machinery of retail
distribution serving the book trade was insufficient
for his purpose. It is insufficient for most purposes,
but its insufficiency in the case of Harold Bell
Wright was painful and intolerable. With the
most remarkable courage, effort and persistence the
publishers constructed a new and complete retail
mechanism to serve the special need. Those who
have no knowledge of the problems of merchandising
will be unable to appreciate what they did. A
few details are in order. First, the larger book
publishers in the United States seldom sell directly
to retailers in cities of less than 50,000; smaller
publishers seldom enter cities of less than 100,000.
The needs of bookstores in little cities and towns,
mixed and important only in the aggregate, are
taken care of by jobbers. There are possibly 1,000
first-rate bookstores to serve a nation of well over
100,000,000 people—of whom, however, some
20,000,000 are incapable of ever reading a book of
any importance in an understanding way. There
are cities of 50,000 in which no first-rate bookstore
exists. On the other hand a magazine like Pictorial
Review, solidly established on the demand for dress
patterns, or a magazine like Saturday Evening Post,
promulgating fiction patterns, penetrates into places
where no new book is ever seen. So, too, do certain
denominational religious papers. And in vast areas
of the Middle and Far West, there is a seepage
from those reservoirs of modern merchandising, the
mail order houses, the Roosevelt Dams of commerce,
constantly seeking, more and more achieving
the reclamation of the deserts of trade.
The “producers,” in stage parlance, of Harold
Bell Wright determined to utilise all these channels.
It was a great risk of judgment and money at the
outset but it succeeded. This is no place to go into
the history of a unique performance in merchandising
but the results have a distinct place in any
record of the author exploited. For one thing, it
may be asked if the success with Wright is of value
in selling other authors, and while there can be no
dogmatic answer to the question it is probable that
in most cases it is not. And another phase of the
results throws a significant light on the nature of
Wright’s work, confirming what we have said about
the terms of his appeal to his readers. When a
Wright novel is published the orders pile in from
stores and places with which a publisher has ordinarily
no contact; and the order from a hamlet in
North Carolina is likely to exceed the order from
Brentano’s in New York.
This means two things. It means, naturally, that
with the heavy campaigns of advertising in all sorts
of periodicals from Saturday Evening Post to Zion’s
Herald, the publishers reach the people who buy
a book a year or less often. But also it means that
Wright is the moralist, the fabulist and the Sayer
we have termed him. On the technical side, perhaps
the most instructive detail of this selling performance
is the way in which it is initiated. Six
months before a new Wright story is to be published,
thousands of tradespeople all over the United States
know that the story is to be published, and when,
and with what enormous advertising placed in forty
specified periodicals and several dozen newspapers
it will be “pushed”; and then begins the steady
succession of personal letters and even telegrams,
circulars and placards and posters, honest-minded
persons in remote settlements discuss with enthusiasm
and awe the prodigious sum of money to be expended
on “just this one book, a book,” librarians
grow anxious and advertising men eager, preachers
prepare sermons, in thousands upon thousands of
homes the Christmas gift to Mother is pre-determined,—until
at last, in a wide-rolling wave of
excitement, a vast surge of the people of simple
faith and worthy ideals, the day comes when the
book is born....
vi
It has been said that Wright is of magnetic
personality, with fine, clean, inspiring ideals, a man
of tireless endeavour, a person who “stirs in one
emotions of which one is not ashamed.” Also that
“he radiates a Lincolnian type of rugged honesty”
... and much more of the same sort. All such
lingo is meaningless outside the atmosphere of
Wright’s books. The language of those novels is
not one of literary conventions but of certain
inalterable thought-conventions; and so, necessarily,
is language addressed to those who read Wright.
“She stood before him in all the beautiful strength
of her young womanhood.”... “It is his almost
clairvoyant power of reading the human soul that
has made Mr. Wright’s books among the most remarkable
of the present age.” These two statements
are demonstrably true to the many whose
minds, struck by such sentences, give back the ring
of silver. They are not true in themselves; but
then, we know no things that are. To be “true”
is simply to signify enough, at a given time, in
particular circumstances, to some individual or
individuals.
That truth Mr. Wright has had enormously, and
still has. His newest novel, The Mine With the
Iron Door, although in no way an elaboration of
the traditional tale of that mine—it was supposed
to be a wonder mine, where the old Spanish Fathers
got the gold that enriched their splendid altars—weaves
the old legend through its texture of incident.
This gives to the novel a colour beyond the
colour it has from its Arizona setting; but the point
with Mr. Wright is something like this: Every
life has its “mine with the iron door,” its dreams
that can never come true, its hopes that belong to
a past that is forever dead. Nevertheless, he will
have you believe, though the lost mine may never
be found nor the iron door opened, some riches of
happiness is still possible. Were it not for this
element, this presentation of something that at a
given time and in particular circumstances can signify
truth to many, many people, Mr. Wright’s
new novel would be no more than a picturesque
and exciting adventure narrative of the Arizona
desert.
vii
Mr. Wright went to Tucson, Arizona, some ten
years ago on a business errand. Three days after
reaching the city he had bought a cottage. Now he
owns eighty acres outside Tucson and has built a
new home, a comfortable but by no means pretentious
house with a garden transplanted from the
neighbouring desert. The scale of living is modest.
Wright and his wife take care of the grounds and
house, to a large extent; and there is usually not
more than one servant. Mr. Wright has a motor
car that he has driven for six years and will continue
to drive for some years yet. He is fond of horseback
riding and spends as much time camping as
at home. Two or three tents, the car, some tinned
stuff and staples and plenty of ammunition are all
Mr. and Mrs. Wright need, for both are good marksmen.
They shoot for food, but Wright will not
kill a deer.
The stories are frequently written, or largely
written, on these expeditions into the desert. Because
he is not an artist, Wright has a sadly difficult
time. He will submit a story like The Winning
of Barbara Worth to five engineers in order
that they may check up his account of the irrigation
of the desert. A long time was spent in worrisome
“looking over the ground,” visiting factory towns,
interviewing employers and workmen, before Helen
of the Old House took even preliminary shape. As
a rule, the incidents Wright uses are transcribed
from life, producing the effect of extreme incredibility
of which his readers sometimes complain.
Being his readers, they are silenced when he tells
them of the actual occurrence.
Hildegarde Hawthorne has pointed out the very
great and incontestable service of Wright: He
creates book readers. It requires very little examination
of the facts to discover that thousands whose
reading has been nothing but newspapers and magazines
have been led by Wright’s stories into the
habit of reading a book occasionally. That is an accomplishment
of an importance hard to overrate.
As for the man, there is one story I like better
than any he has written. Some years ago, riding
horseback on a narrow trail, Wright was struck
by an automobile that came suddenly around a
corner of rock. Horse and rider were pitched into
a gully; the horse was killed and Wright’s particularly
bad lung so suffered by the fall that everyone
assured him there was nothing left but to die.
He said: “I won’t die.” Because he couldn’t be
moved, a tent had to be erected over him there in
the gully, so that he might die in the shade. Lying
there under the tent, he fulfilled his purpose by getting
well. He also, under the same tent and in the
same place, wrote When a Man’s a Man.... And
now he is again in good physical shape, riding his
horses after the day’s work is over through the
desert or up into the foothills of the Catalina Mountains.
The preacher he began, the preacher he must
probably remain. There may, perhaps, be something
pitiful in the spectacle of a man struggling
with the palette of words, as there is something
bizarre in the voice proceeding from the wilderness
with a perfectly mundane message: That every
valley had better be filled, every mountain and hill
nicely graded; the crooked carefully straightened,
the rough ways ... paved with asphalt.
Books by Harold Bell Wright
1903 That Printer of Udell’s
1907 The Shepherd of the Hills
1909 The Calling of Dan Matthews
1910 The Uncrowned King
1911 The Winning of Barbara Worth
1912 Their Yesterdays
1914 The Eyes of the World
1916 When a Man’s a Man
1919 The Re-Creation of Brian Kent
1921 Helen of the Old House
1923 The Mine With the Iron Door
Sources on Harold Bell Wright
Harold Bell Wright. Booklet published by D.
Appleton & Company Harold Bell Wright, the Man Behind the Novels,
by HILDEGARDE HAWTHORNE. Booklet published
by D. Appleton & Company
Private Information
8. “Ah, Did You Once See Shelley Plain?”
i
Ah, did you once see Shelley plain,
And did he stop and speak to you?
And did you speak to him again?
How strange it seems, and new!
Browning: Memorabilia
THE four lines, and, indeed, the twelve remaining
lines of this one of Robert Browning’s
shorter poems illustrate very well the man’s superlative
faculty of drama. With a little of our Edwin
Arlington Robinson, he mixed a little of our Eugene
O’Neill; and, on occasion, expressed himself with
point and passion. Such was his simplicity that he
appeared (it is now laughable to remember) rather
especially unintelligible. Not far distant yet are
the days when we banded together to understand
him. But the number of Browning Clubs now surviving
must be very few. How curious that we
never thought to try to understand the man himself!
How queer that we didn’t concentrate, as he would
have concentrated in a similar instance, upon the
thirteen years that unlock his life; but we didn’t.
We generalised about him concerning whom, of all
men of his day, it was least safe to generalise. It
has remained for Frances M. Sim in her Robert
Browning, The Poet and the Man: 1833-1846 to do
the thing that has so needed doing. She has very
wisely avoided the form of the full biography and
equally the form, which would be sterile in this
instance, of a full-length critique. Her book is at
once a freely-handled and intensive study of the
years that lay between the publication of Browning’s
first poem, “Pauline,” and his marriage with
Elizabeth Barrett. She starts with “Pauline,”
accompanies him to Russia and with him brings
back “Paracelsus,” goes with him to Italy and recreates
“Sordello.” Then, with almost no preliminaries,
we are into the love affair. When that
has been lived again to its fruition, we are in possession
of “the poet and the man” in the only
possible fashion apart from the body of his work.
Frances M. Sim has given us a valuable and interesting
study, and simply by obeying the wisdom in
Arthur Waugh’s words: “Browning’s marriage, in
short, was the last stage in his artistic education”—words
that open a fascinating path of speculative
insights into the lives of how many of the world’s
artists!
Contrast, if you will, the temperamental difference
between such a man as Robert Browning, who
had his early and well-nigh fatal intoxication from
reading the poetry of Shelley, and a fellow like
Joseph Farington, the painter, whose death occurred
when Browning was a lad of nine. No literary
discovery in years has made half the sensation of
the finding of The Farington Diary, and quite
rightly, for what could be compared to the disclosure
of a contemporary account in which Boswell,
Burke, Goldsmith, Horace Walpole, the Thrales,
Garrick, Mrs. Siddons, Nelson, Howe, Mirabeau,
Marat, Napoleon, Hoppner, Turner, Pitt, Warren
Hastings, Lady Hamilton and Robert Burns were
intimately noted? And yet Farington, ruler of
the Royal Academy though a most indifferent artist,
came into touch with all these personages and was
apparently never for one moment carried off his
feet. I think it is quite true, as Robert Cortes
Holliday suggests in a review of The Farington
Diary (The Bookman, June, 1923) that Farington
saw only the surface of that great age, that he was
devoid of humour and lacked the malice which a
diarist should feel. He was sane, not to say stupid;
but as a conscientious accumulator of facts I can
think of no one who is his equal. Amid riches and
grandeur, intriguery and wars and revolutions, surrounded
by a glittering society in which one knew
not which to worship, genius or scintillance, Joseph
Farington scrupulously set down all the diseases
of people he knew, all the dishes served at a dinner,
how much everything cost and the money that
everyone made, inherited, bequeathed or borrowed.
It was only accidentally, that matters touched with
human interest flowed from the point of his pen;
but in a fairly long lifetime the number of such
leakages runs high, and the result, despite every
exasperation and handicap, is to make a book of
very great and most indubitable value. The first
volume of The Farington Diary, covering the years
1793-1802, is the most complete portrait album we
have of its time; the remaining volumes, which, it
is understood, go on to Farington’s death in 1821,
should not be less valuable.
ii
Great times, in producing great men, produce
great books as well. In the lifetime of Walter H.
Page, publisher, business man and American Ambassador
to the Court of St. James’s, the number of
persons who had any comprehension of his greatness
was singularly small. Those who had the fine
fortune to be associated with him in the day’s work
knew, of course, the stature of the man; but it was
scarcely possible to impress their knowledge on
others. When Mr. Page at last became conspicuous
in the public service it was at a post where his work
and the character enforcing it were necessarily
almost completely obscured. An American Ambassador
at the Court of St. James’s at the present time
may conceivably bring himself into a good deal of
notice; it is not impossible to be done and the opportunities
for doing it legitimately are not infrequent;
but Mr. Page was never one for that sort of
thing, and I doubt whether, even if the war had
not hidden him in its drifting mists as he steered
the ship, he would have come in all his lifetime to
our not always intelligently directed attention.
There are some men, and among them our greatest,
whom death alone fully discloses. Such was
Walter H. Page, and in the magnificent biography
wrought by Burton J. Hendrick, The Life and
Letters of Walter H. Page, the subject is handled
with a justness and a careful proportioning for
which praise should not be stinted, and has not
been. Unquestionably this is one of the great
American books in the biographical field; this life
and these letters have something so vital that one
hunts a ready comparison in vain. At times they
seem to paint the man with rich colour and a splendid
handling of light; at other times they carve and
sculpture him in some detail of a rare personality;
but the figure fails before the ruddiness, the mobile
vigour and the unresting intellect which the book
sets forth. In a day when the state of America is
rather often canvassed and most often with pessimistic
conclusions, it is significant that The Life
and Letters of Walter H. Page, a fairly expensive
work in two volumes, has sold half a hundred thousand
copies and now, a year after its publication,
continues to lead in sales of non-fiction.
It is but one, of course, of a number of great
books yielded by the times we have lived in. The
Irish Guards in the Great War, by Rudyard Kipling,
is surely another. Mr. Kipling has not always
been regarded as a sympathetic and understanding
friend of Irishmen. His son, John Kipling, was an
officer of the Irish Guards and, as such, gave his life.
The choice of Mr. Kipling as the historian of the
regiment was one which only the resultant chronicle
would justify; but to my mind there is no possible
question that the work justifies and more than justifies.
The reviewer for the London Times puts the
matter pithily when he says: “The true gold of
Mr. Kipling is to be found unalloyed in this memorial.”
The temptation to embitteredness, the
impulse to “handle” and fashion his material or to
give it stylistic treatment and the natural inclination
to fix the point of view have all been quietly laid
aside; and we have a book of continuous vividness
that results from the inner perspective to which Mr.
Kipling rigidly holds his account. He constantly
uses the sentences on the lips of his Irishmen and
we are seldom conscious of a narrator—then only
when some Kiplingesque epithet or phrase carries
us above the trench and, as it were, above the battle.
The London Times reviewer speaks of the “wealth
of detail, varied, terrible, and sometimes grotesque,
as in the best Gothic” in the presentation of which
Kipling manages to preserve a clean simplicity of
outline and a unity or totality of effect; but this is
merely a way of saying that the book is epically
written. Mere largeness of subject has nowadays a
way of being taken for “epic” treatment, although
the word should properly be confined to a treatment
in which a great mass of detail is not allowed to
obscure the simplicity of the whole. But I do not
think anyone can fail in appreciation of The Irish
Guards, and to any who may be tempted to forgo
the reading of the history let me quote these closing
words: “Of all these things nothing but the memory
would remain. And, as they moved—little more
than a company strong—in the wake of their seniors,
one saw, here and there among the wounded in civil
kit, young men with eyes that did not match their
age, shaken beyond speech or tears by the splendour
and the grief of that memory.”
The final distinction of Mr. Kipling’s book is,
to be sure, that it is the work of a man who knows
how to write. This distinction it shares with the
fewest possible number of contemporary histories,
but The World Crisis, by Winston Churchill, must
be admitted within the slender group. Perhaps
we had rather forgotten Winston Churchill, the
young journalist in Africa during the Boer War
(and the hero, incidentally, of one of the greatest
prisoner escapes to be found in all history). There
may also be some heredity in Winston Churchill’s
literary gift, as in his other brilliant personal endowments.
But that’s no matter. As a former
British Home Secretary, First Lord of the Admiralty,
1911-15, and Minister of Munitions in
1917—above all, perhaps, as the man chiefly held
responsible for the Gallipoli venture—Mr. Churchill’s
account would be of the very first interest and
importance were he never so unskilful among words.
But The World Crisis makes apparent what some
of us had suspected before, that among leading
statesmen there has rarely been one whose ability to
defend his course and make other courses appear
small has equalled Winston Churchill’s. The sense
of scale amid vastness in sums of money, tonnage of
ships and lives of men that Mr. Churchill possesses
is laid by some commentators to his American blood.
“He savours hugeness like a dainty; and when he
writes of carnage or battle he dips his pen in blood,”
says Filson Young, adding, “But he never for a
moment loses his grip of the subject, or his sense of
ever-marching destiny; and he never fails to thrill
the reader with the sense of the human tragedy
lurking in its every step.” Mr. Young thinks The
World Crisis places its author “in the very first
rank of British historians; and I think it places him
in very nearly the first rank of British statesmen.”
The two most famous living British statesmen, Mr.
Lloyd George and Mr. Asquith, flank Mr. Churchill’s
book with what went before and what may
come after. The Right Honourable Herbert Henry
Asquith’s The Genesis of the War contains, of
course, many noteworthy pen portraits; no doubt
these will make the most immediate appeal to
readers; yet his disclosures regarding the British
War Book, begun in 1910 and his exposition of “the
purposes and methods of British policy” in the pre-war
years are the book’s greatest justification and
its strongest historical importance. Mr. Lloyd
George, characteristically, is far less concerned
about the past than about the future. In Where
Are We Going? he moves alertly over troubled
ground of European affairs, discussing the League
of Nations, Russian republicanism, Socialism, national
armaments, the Irish Treaty, the position of
France, England’s war debt, prohibition, the disclosure
of war secrets, “the next war” and many
other topics. His preface is particularly interesting.
iii
Naturally, the climax of interest is reached when
we can say: “This man has written of himself.”
G. Stanley Hall’s Life and Confessions of a Psychologist
is an autobiography of which one feels
a keen anxiety lest the many whom it can reward
may somehow miss reading it. “I am far older
than my years”—he is seventy-seven—“for I have
laid aside more of the illusions and transcended
more of the limitations with which I started than
most.” These simple and striking words define his
attitude. The truly popular result of a work that
has been undertaken and carried through in such a
spirit ought to be emphasised. Dr. Hall is the
author of important treatises on Adolescence and
Senescence, exhaustive in character and highly
technical in their bearing; but I have yet to read
anything of his which was not to a very large extent
“popularly written” as well as scientifically
valuable. Certainly his Life and Confessions of a
Psychologist deserves the wider audience. It begins
on a New England farm with some chapters that
reflect with ampleness and feeling and charm the
life of New England in the 1850s; it continues
through the various stages of an unusually rounded
education; in its record of teaching and college
executiveship the book constitutes a sort of history
of the American college in the last half-century, and
this is enlarged and given the value of ripened conclusions
by a longer chapter near the close of the
book. There is also a tremendous chapter covering
“Process in Psychology” and practically constituting
a history of the science in Dr. Hall’s long lifetime—one
might almost say since psychology was
recognised as a science at all. But these points,
while they demonstrate easily enough that the book
is one no teacher or psychologist can afford to omit
attending, do not make the case for the book as a
sample of autobiography or as a work of popular
interest. Then let some of the contents make it!
Here is the report of an American who has known
Mark Hopkins, Charles Eliot Norton, Henry Ward
Beecher, George Bancroft, Treitschke, Wundt,
Helmholtz, William James, Lord Kelvin, Jowett,
Pasteur and many others; an American who can
write of his boyhood with something of the charm
of W. H. Hudson and much the same feeling for
nature; who can write with frankness of the vita
sexualis in the New England of Emerson; who can—we
fall back upon it—write!
A fellow-scientist of Dr. Hall’s though in quite
another field has also written his autobiography,
and the extraordinary circumstances of Michael
Idvorsky Pupin’s life will be enough to attract
popular attention to his From Immigrant to Inventor.
Forty-eight years ago a Serbian boy who
hadn’t a cent and who couldn’t speak a word of
English landed in New York. Since 1901 this
immigrant has been professor of electro-mechanics
at Columbia University; he is the inventor of the
Pupin coil, which, by reducing the necessary diameter
of copper wire, has saved millions of dollars,
and he also invented the device for tuning which
many people use daily on radio sets. Michael
Pupin was born at Idvor, Banat, Hungary, in a
little community of Serbs rewarded for their
services against the Turks by the gift of some land
and political rights. In assessing his performance
it must be borne in mind that he had the handicap
of an utterly alien race and culture and speech to
overcome in a far greater degree than Jacob A. Riis,
who was Danish, or Edward Bok, who came from
Holland. Pupin’s autobiography is of manifold
interest; for one thing, he seems completely in
sympathy with an American tradition which so
many immigrants have never been able whole-heartedly
to accept; for another, he traces the developments
of electrical science by the bright thread of
his interest and participation in them, and he does
actually succeed in making some very difficult
scientific achievements quite simple and beautifully
plain.
iv
Very different, if possible more magical, has been
the career of the Russian glovemaker whose adopted
surname is now known everywhere that motion pictures
are exhibited—Samuel Goldwyn. It is only
about nine years since he paid ten cents to see a
two-reel picture in depressing surroundings on
Broadway, and came home to tell his brother-in-law,
Jesse Lasky, that a fortune could be made in five-reel
pictures! Samuel Goldwyn’s book, Behind the
Screen, showing on every page the fine journalistic
skill of his collaborator, Corinne Lowe, is less an
autobiography than a personal record of the people
of the screen. Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford,
Douglas Fairbanks, Mary Garden, Pauline Frederick,
Geraldine Farrar and plenty of others are
here described with an intimacy and a frankness and
a general wit and good humour that it isn’t easy
to imagine will be soon surpassed. The popular
appeal of such a series of “closeups” should be as
limitless as the movie audience, but the book will
serve a less immediate and more important purpose
to the reader whose interest, not fervidly personal,
goes into the general subject of the films—how they
came about, what and why they are, what may come
of them. I do not mean that Mr. Goldwyn concerns
himself directly with any of these questions, for
he scarcely touches them; and yet I think that the
indirect light he throws may be more finally enlightening
than anything else that has come out of Hollywood—certainly
more so than would be likely to
be got by any outsider who might go there in a
direct search. But let that pass. The book, as a
book, is irresistible reading.
v
The boundaries between history, biography, autobiography,
memoirs and the best journalism are
often uncertain and are better so. It does not matter
except to formal minds whether an interest
begins with a person or an event, or in what direction
it proceeds; for the mind, like the body, has its
own system of nutrition, and within pretty broad
limits should be allowed its own dietary. The suggestions
below are additional to those books already
discussed and the classifications need not be taken
as anything more than a general convenience:
Historical.
ADMIRAL SIMS’SThe Victory at Sea (World
War).
BRAND WHITLOCK’SBelgium (World War).
RAY STANNARD BAKER’SWoodrow Wilson and
World Settlement.
Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story (World War).
Memories of a Turkish Statesman, 1913-1919,
by DJEMAL PASHA. A very spirited account, well-written;
almost unique as a book from the Turkish
side. Interesting in its contradictions of Morgenthau.
An Ambassador’s Memoirs, by MAURICE PALEOLOGUE.
By the last French Ambassador to Russia.
Volume I. covers July 3, 1914-June 2, 1915; Volume
II. continues to August 18, 1916.
LAURANCE LYON’SThe Pomp of Power and his
When There Is No Peace, both published anonymously.
The author is in close touch with French
policy.
Old Diplomacy and New: 1876-1922: From
Salisbury to Lloyd George, by A. L. KENNEDY.
The Drama of Sinn Fein, by SHAW DESMOND.
A new and pretty complete history.
The Life of Sir William Harcourt, by A. G.
GARDINER. Harcourt was born before Victoria
ascended the throne and he outlived her; Mr.
Gardiner brings unusual talents to what becomes
less a biography of one man than a portrayal of
an era.
Memoirs of the Empress Eugenie, by COMTE
FLEURY. Here likewise the historical interest is as
strong as the biographical.
Lady Palmerston and Her Times, by MABELL,
COUNTESS OF AIRLIE. Of value for its picture of
the period from George III. to the middle of the
Nineteenth Century.
PAUL VAN DYKE’SCatherine de Medici, in two
volumes, now in its third printing, is distinguished
by lucidity, an avoidance of easy ornament and
floridity, and by great literary charm.
More Purely Personal.
The Letters of Lord and Lady Wolseley, edited
by SIR GEORGE ARTHUR. The intimacies of a great
soldier and his brilliant wife, with many glimpses
of British society from 1870 to 1911.
Margot Asquith: An Autobiography. Volumes
III. and IV., although dealing with British war politics,
are chiefly personal in interest.
Memories of Later Years, by OSCAR BROWNING.
By a much-travelled Englishman, a friend of Queen
Mary, Lord Curzon and Lloyd George, now
past eighty. He deals principally with persons
and events since 1897. Arthur Bartlett Maurice,
reviewing the book in the New York Herald,
speaks of the book as “a narrative which gives
the flavor of Europe of yesterday, of a world that
is gone.” The volume is a mine of anecdotes of
the great.
Post Mortem, by C. MACLAURIN, M.D., somewhat
resembles Dr. Joseph Collins’s The Doctor Looks at
Literature—only in this case historical figures are
the persons dissected. Henry VIII., the historian
Gibbon, Joan of Arc, and Samuel Pepys are some
of the subjects.
A Nineteenth Century Romance, by MAJOR C. H.
DUDLEY WARD. A love story in two generations
based on authentic letters and beginning in the days
of Napoleon the Great with the love letters of Dora
Best to George Brett and continuing with the love
affair of their son who, in 1897, became Viscount
Esher.
Lady Rose Weigall, by RACHEL WEIGALL. Lady
Rose was the favourite niece of the great Duke of
Wellington. Her long life (1834-1921) brought
her in contact with Meyerbeer, Mendelssohn, Rubenstein,
Jenny Lind, Bismarck, Browning, Disraeli,
Lord Palmerston, Dickens, the Empress Eugenie
and many royalties. Not the least interesting things
are her letters exchanged with Germany during the
World War.
“Indiscretions” of Lady Susan, by LADY SUSAN
TOWNLEY. Entertaining and well-edged gossip by
the wife of a diplomat who was stationed in many
countries.
The Literary Spotlight, with an introduction by
JOHN FARRAR. Personal portraits of contemporary
American writers, first published in The Bookman,
and anonymous to permit greater candour. Louis
Untermeyer, Mary Johnston, F. Scott Fitzgerald,
Floyd Dell, Sinclair Lewis, Owen Johnson, Edna
Ferber, Amy Lowell and others are included.
Unusual Biographies and Autobiographies.
Thomas Nelson Page: A Memoir of a Virginia
Gentleman, by ROSWELL PAGE.
All in a Lifetime, by HENRY MORGENTHAU.
My Life and Work, by HENRY FORD in collaboration
with SAMUEL CROWTHER.
My Boyhood, by JOHN BURROUGHS.
Lord Northcliffe: a Memoir, by MAX PEMBERTON.
Fourteen Years a Sailor, by JOHN KENLON. The
Chief of the New York Fire Department in a naïve
and pleasing account of his Irish boyhood.
The Life of an American Sailor: Admiral William
Hemsley Emory, from his letters and memoirs
edited by ADMIRAL ALBERT GLEAVES.
Mr. Lloyd George, by E. T. RAYMOND.
The Americanization of Edward Bok, by EDWARD
W. BOK. One of the most widely read of American
autobiographies and still in strong demand.
A Man From Maine, by EDWARD W. BOK. A
biography of Cyrus H. K. Curtis, head of the Curtis
Publishing Company of Philadelphia.
From McKinley to Harding: Personal Recollections
of Our Presidents, by H. H. KOHLSAAT. The
political interest is strong.
The Print of My Remembrance, by AUGUSTUS
THOMAS. For all who are interested in the theatre
and its people.
WALTER DAMROSCH’SMy Musical Life begins
with a childhood in Germany and aside from its
autobiographical interest constitutes to some extent
a history of orchestral music in America.
My Memories of Eighty Years, by CHAUNCEY M.
DEPEW. About evenly personal and political in
interest.
Letters of James Gibbons Huneker, edited by
JOSEPHINE HUNEKER, and MR. HUNEKER’SSteeplejack
(autobiographical). The record of one
of our most brilliant critics, versatile in all the
arts.
John H. Patterson: The Pioneer in Industrial
Welfare, by SAMUEL CROWTHER. Of a similar interest
with HENRY FORD’SMy Life and Work.
The Editorials of Henry Watterson, edited by
ARTHUR KROCK. They complete his own account
of himself in “Marse Henry.” The political interest
is naturally the main thing and is exceedingly vivid
(1868-1921).
The Life of Lord Rosebery, by E. T. RAYMOND.
Analytical biography.
C. K. S., An Autobiography, by CLEMENT K.
SHORTER. The author is a veteran English critic
and writer.
The Life of William Schwenk Gilbert, by SIDNEY
DARK. Gilbert of Gilbert and Sullivan, “The
Mikado,” “H. M. S. Pinafore,” etc.
FRANK SWINNERTON’SGeorge Gissing: A Critical
Study, and his Robert Louis Stevenson: A Critical
Study. The interest is literary rather than
biographical.
Tennyson: A Modern Portrait, by HUGH I’ANSON
FAUSSET. Both literary and biographical in its
interest. Richard Le Gallienne, in the New
York Times, says: “The manner of this portrait
is very attractive. Biography and criticism are artfully
and suggestively blended, and the influence
of Tennyson’s environment throughout his life on
the development of his character and his poetry is
vividly and for the most part convincingly illuminated.”
The Life of William Hazlitt, by P. P. HOWE.
The only biography we have of a remarkable literary
figure.
Victor Hugo: His Work and Love, by ANDREW
C. P. HAGGARD. A new account. The romantic
element in Hugo’s life is emphasised, although not
unduly.
Embassies I Have Known, by WALBURGA, LADY
PAGET. The English, German and Austrian Courts
in the last half-century.
Two Books About English Seats.
Knole and the Sackvilles, by V. SACKVILLE-WEST.
See Chapter 6.
Earlham, by PERCY LUBBOCK.
9. Alice in Authorland and Penrod’s Five-Foot Shelf
Alice in Authorland.
STUFF and nonsense!” said Alice, to the White
Queen, flinging the book on the floor.
“Exactly,” the White Queen replied.
“Haven’t you anything a self-respecting person
can read?” Alice inquired.
“A self-respecting person,” answered the White
Queen, “would not ask such a silly question. She
would accompany me into Authorland and make the
acquaintance of the people there and learn to find
her way about. Instead,” added the White Queen,
cuttingly, “instead of bothering me. I am very
busy.”
“Well, if you’re very busy, you won’t want to
take me with you and introduce me to all those
people,” Alice observed, a trifle sulkily.
“Of course I will!” The White Queen spoke
with annoyance but also with cheerfulness, for she
prided herself on seldom being one-sided. “I am
never too busy to loiter. And let me tell you that
when you become too busy to loiter you will find
everyone else too lazy to live with—and then what
will you do?”
Alice admitted she didn’t know. The White
Queen was in a great hurry because, as she said,
once in Authorland it would only be possible to
make haste slowly. They looked up the timetable
and found any number of editions just leaving.
As they were entering a compartment the guard
came along, crying: “Here! You can’t go in there!
That’s reserved for fairies”—but a very pleasant-looking
woman who was already seated inside stuck
out her head and said: “Oh, do let the little girl
come in. Besides, she’s with the White Queen, who
may ride anywhere.” So the guard let them in,
with a good deal of grumbling, slammed the door
and blew his whistle and they were off. The pleasant-faced
woman smiled at Alice, and Alice took
courage to ask:
“Are you a fairy, then?”
“No, my dear, but I write about them. It’s more
fun than being one, really. My name is Rose Fyleman
and I live part of the time in London and part
of it in Fairy Hills—that’s the nice residence section
of Authorland, you know.”
“What are your books, please?” Alice asked,
primly.
“Oh, there’s Rose Fyleman’s Fairy Book, and
The Fairy Flute, and The Fairy Green and Fairies
and Chimneys—all poems—and The Rainbow Cat,
whom I knew very well and admired no end. He
used to walk about the Child’s Garden of Verse—that’s
the little village green with flower-beds in
Fairy Hills.”
Rose Fyleman lent Alice some of her books to
read on the train. The White Queen slept in a corner,
but finally sprang up, crying: “We’re here,
we’re here!”
“But the train isn’t stopping,” protested Alice.
Rose Fyleman and the White Queen laughed.
“Silly,” said the White Queen, “it isn’t a train, it’s
an edition, and editions never stop in Authorland.
You just jump off anywhere.” And with that she
jumped. So did Rose Fyleman, pausing to say:
“You won’t mind it. Landing in a heap of books
is such fun.” Alice finally summoned her courage
and jumped, too. A man six feet tall and over
caught her nicely and set her down right side up.
Then he very politely introduced himself. He was
Frederick Arnold Kummer, he said, and it was his
business to catch girls and boys and set them down
right side up. “With care,” he added.
Alice thanked him and took the two books he
handed her, The First Days of Man and another
called The First Days of Knowledge. “You won’t
need these here,” he explained, “but you’ll find them
very useful and probably interesting and maybe
exciting when you go back.”
There was no trace of the White Queen, so Alice
went down the road, picking her way among the
books planted everywhere, until a white-haired
and smiling old lady sent out her boy, Nils, to
show her the way about. Nils said the white-haired
woman was Selma Lagerlöf, and she had written
for him two sets of wonderful adventures. He had
been a rather bad boy and Selma Lagerlöf had
turned him into an elf and later had sent him
through animal land. “I’ll give you the books,”
said Nils, picking out a couple that stood between
two book ends at corners of the road. “Here they
are—The Wonderful Adventures of Nils and The
Further Adventures of Nils.”
Alice thought she should like to go back and talk
with Selma Lagerlöf, whose smile had seemed mysterious
and wonderful, but Nils was bent on showing
her the animals. Of these there were quantities,
and Nils knew them all, it appeared, and their
owners.
“That there’s Brer Rabbit,” he was beginning,
when Alice interrupted to say, “You can’t say ‘that
there.’” “Yes, I can,” he retorted, “I’ve just said
it.” Alice saw he was hopeless, like all boys, and
paid no further attention to his grammar, while Nils
discussed the creatures, both wild and tame, all
about. Some grazed peacefully, some were frisking
and playing, and a few gyred and gimbled in the
wabe like the slithy toves Alice had heard her
friend, Mr. Lewis Carroll, tell about. Brer Rabbit
didn’t in the least resemble the White Rabbit, being
brown in colour and having no vest pocket with a
watch and chain. Uncle Remus and Uncle Remus’s
friend, Joel Chandler Harris, kept tabs on Brer
Rabbit. Forrestine C. Hooker was feeding lumps
of sugar to the Comanche pony named Star that
she has written about in Star: The Story of an
Indian Pony, and Prince Jan, the St. Bernard of
her other book, stood gravely by her. Ernest
Thompson Seton, looking more wild than his wildest
animals, was racing about, trying to keep track
of his grey squirrel, Bannertail, of Krag and Randy
and Johnny Bear and Chink, of Lobo, Rag and
Vixen, and especially of the Sandhill Stag. “It’s
the hardest work,” he assured Alice, stopping for a
moment to subdue his hair and wipe his forehead,
“to observe all their habits. I simply couldn’t ever
do it if I didn’t have wide margins in my books
and make a little drawing whenever I noted a new
habit. Bad habits in the lefthand margins, good
habits in the righthand margins.” “But,” said
Alice, wonderingly, “the drawings all look alike to
me.” “You might as well say all animals look alike
to you,” said Mr. Seton, impatiently. “But they
don’t know good and bad, though; all they know is
habits. Now, if children only had habits they
would be as interesting as animals.” “I’m sure I
don’t know,” answered Alice, doubtfully.
Nils had disappeared and the White Queen was
nowhere in sight, either. “It’s a strange place,”
thought Alice. “It is, indeed,” said a man who
was busy painting magnificent pictures in most glowing
colours. “It’s strange because no one ever stays
long enough to bore you.” “Oh, is that it?” Alice
answered. But she was really much impressed.
She looked at the gorgeous paintings, each signed
“N. C. Wyeth” and each outdoing the one before.
She thought with secret ecstasy: “I’m only going
to have books with his pictures in them.” Mr.
Wyeth, who seemed to understand her thought,
said out loud: “You’ll find others—Kay Nielsen
and Arthur Rackham and Edmund Dulac and Noel
Pocock.” Alice said, “Yes, no doubt,” but in her
own mind she decided it must be because he was
as modest as he was wonderful.
“Do you like boys’ stories?” asked a boy much
older than Nils, who had come up suddenly. “Of
course!” Alice responded. She looked at him more
closely. “Why you must be the boy in High Benton,
aren’t you?” He grinned. “I guess I am.
I was only going to say, if you like boys’ stories—and
all the girls I know do—my friend, William
Heyliger, has written a new one, The Spirit of the
Leader. It’s stuff like High Benton, a high school
story. Great!” Alice was about to ask him for the
book when all the editions began running past so
rapidly that she became dizzy and screamed and
shut her eyes. When she opened them a moment
later, Authorland had vanished and she was back
at her starting place and the White Queen was
asking with sharpness:
“Have you been all this time deciding on something
to read? You have to read, you know, in
order to grow up; and at this rate you’ll never grow
up at all!”
Penrod’s Five-Foot Shelf.
Feeling the need of solitude, Penrod Schofield
moved slowly toward the barn. As he walked he
kicked desultorily at such objects, animate and inanimate,
as obtruded themselves in his path—the
round top of the water cutoff in the lawn, on which
he had broken the blades of the lawn mower last
Saturday; a bag of clothes pins reposing harmlessly
on its side, and the white cat, Sherlock Holmes.
“Ole cat!” Sherlock, untarnished by the hostile
toe, trotted off complacently. Creatures like Penrod
were little in the life of one who had been victor
over the hound of the neighbouring Baskervilles.
Choosing Entrance Two, the youth ascended to
Apartment B-3 of the barn, a second-story location
offering an outside window with no bath but with
proper seclusion. Here on a conscientiously measured
shelf of his own manufacture was the beginning
of the Penrod Schofield Library. The shelf,
constructed in his leisure hours, was exactly five
feet in length, a noted educator having assured Penrod
and others, through the medium of many full-page
advertisements, that the books on a five-foot
shelf could furnish the equivalent of a college education.
With a passion for exactitude, and in
pursuance of a further condition, Penrod was
devoting to the books on his five-foot shelf a requisite
fifteen minutes a day.
“Five feet divided by fifteen minutes a day makes—makes——.”
The youth struggled for a while
with this intricate problem in arithmetic, at length
muttering: “I know. Y’ count the pages, and then
divide by fifteen; no, by the number of pages y’ c’n
read in fifteen minutes;—no, that ain’t right either,
is it?” There was no answer; there would be none
if he looked in the back of one of the books, either;
and for a while Penrod had a doubt whether, on
looking in the back of the noted educator’s head,
any answer would be found there. He did not understand
how the educator could possibly be right,
nohow, for of course the first and indispensable item
for any book shelf was the complete works of G. A.
Henty. He ran his eye along these:
Bravest of the Brave; or, With Peterborough in
Spain
By Sheer Pluck: A Tale of the Ashanti War
With Clive in India; or, The Beginnings of an
Empire
Few, but still a beginning. A catalogue recently
procured assured him that there were at least thirty-five
more that he should possess. Allowing an inch
per volume, which he had found necessary, fully
three feet of the five must be reserved for the author
of By Pike and Dyke: A Tale of the Rise of the
Dutch Republic and other classical studies in the
historical field. Still, the two feet remaining gave
probable space for a coupla dozen lesser masterpieces.
He examined the volumes already in place:
Treasure Island, by ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON
It had sixteen full-page pictures in colour, lining
papers and a coloured title page by Wyeth, and was
quite satisfactory.
The Boy Scouts’ Year Book: 1923
Penrod had belonged to a troop which had busted
up and there was no use joining another as he expected
to begin smoking shortly, anyway. However,
this book was useful, containing stories and
talks on sports and tales of true adventure and Dan
Beard’s camping stuff and “Boys Who Have Made
Good” and a bunch of funny stories and—best of
all—all about radio.
For the Good of the Team, by RALPH HENRY
BARBOUR
This was a brand-new, regular hot story about
Stuart Harven captaining the football team at Manning
School and his roommate, Neal Orr, and other
fellows. Penrod regarded it as a slick story and
nobody was going to borrow it from him for a darn
good long while because it was brand-new and a hot
story.
Lochinvar Luck, by ALBERT PAYSON TERHUNE
One of those he-men, you said it, this Albert Payson
Terhune and two-fisted and all, and writes the
grandest dog stories a fellow ever gets hold of, no
Black Beauty here-nice-doggie story but a corkin’
story about how Jamie Mackellar, a plucky little
truck driver, mortgages his truck to own a fine
th’rough-bred collie and the kennel owner who is a
crook stings him bad; but the measly pup runs away
and lives wild and grows a wonderful bone and
coat; and then Jamie captures him back and takes
him to the show and what Jamie and the dog do to
that crook kennel owner is some cautionary warning
to all crooks.
Fourteen Years a Sailor, by JOHN KENLON
This here’s a good sea story, especially when they
get shipwrecked on the desolate Crozet Islands and
make a wonderful escape, hard to believe but it
musta been so, because Kenlon he comes to New
York later and sees a fire panic in a theatre and that
turns him to be a fireman. Now he’s Chief of the
New York City Fire Department, can you beat it?
What wouldn’t I give to ride to a four-alarm fire
with him, going like mad!
Kim, by RUDYARD KIPLING
Things in this story of Kim I don’t just get hold of,
but it’s a great story all right and I’ve read it twice
and I bet I read it some more. Got to get the
Jungle Books and Captains Courageous to put
alongside it. Certainly Kipling’s the real thing,
most especially on India.
The Boy’s Book of Inventions, by RAY STANNARD
BAKER
Well, of course. A fellow’d have to have that, and
the on’y thing was to get hold of the other, The
Boy’s Second Book of Inventions it was called, to
go with it. Couldn’t have too many books like that
which besides being useful, and the kind you c’n
always get your folks to give you for presents, was
interesting, like most of the books they give hardly
ever are.
Penrod reflected. No use to worry. He had
room for ’most twenty more books, anyway, allowing
for Henty; and when he had read some of these
enough he could give one away now and then. Or
maybe start a circulating library, a cent a week,
which would leave room on the shelves and bring in
money for new books.... From the distance came
a voice: “Penrod!” His mother was calling, and
as it unquestionably was a call to supper, perhaps
he had better respond. He moved away. “Gosh,
my fifteen minutes was gone an’ I never read anything.
Takes fifteen darn minutes a day deciding
what to read. Maybe she’s got strawberry shortcake
I c’d eat five feet of that no trouble at all!”
Books for Alices and Penrods.
It has become the fashion to try to classify books
for boys and girls by ages, but as children’s mental
ages, tastes, interests and other details vary not less
widely than adults’, it is much more discreet to
arrange the “juveniles,” so-called, by general characters.
Books not explicitly named above are included
in the following very limited and rather
carefully chosen groups:
All About Animals.
MARGERY WILLIAM’SThe Velveteen Rabbit,
with colour pictures by William Nicholson. Unusual
pictures drawn on stone by the artist.
MARSHALL SAUNDERS’SBonnie Prince Fetlar and
her The Wandering Dog
ALBERT PAYSON TERHUNE’SBuff: A Collie and
his Further Adventures of Lad
WILLIAM T. HORNADAY’SThe Minds and Manners
of Wild Animals
ERNEST THOMPSON SETON’SBannertail: The
Story of a Grey Squirrel, his Wild Animals I Have
Known, his Lives of the Hunted—all illustrated by
the author.
JOEL CHANDLER HARRIS’SUncle Remus: His
Songs and Sayings, with 112 illustrations by A. B.
Frost. Mostly about animals. It is important to
have Mr. Frost’s pictures.
RUDYARD KIPLING’SThe Jungle Book and The
Second Jungle Book have been mentioned; likewise
FORRESTINE HOOKER’SStar and her Prince Jan: St.
Bernard. The Elephant’s Child, the Sing-Song of
Old Man Kangaroo, and How the Alphabet Was
Made are Kipling selections now published as separate
small books
For quite little boys and girls there are the MAY
BYRON books: The Little Black Bear, The Little
Brown Rooster, The Little Yellow Duckling, and
The Little Tan Terrier; and also books by JOHN
BRECK, as follows:
Mostly About Nibble the Bunny Nibble Rabbit Makes More Friends The Sins of Silvertip the Fox Tad Coon’s Tricks The Wavy Tailed Warrior Tad Coon’s Great Adventure The Bad Little Owls The Jay Bird Who Went Tame
Introducing Fairies.
All the books named above by ROSE FYLEMAN,
including The Rainbow Cat
Fairy Tales by the BROTHERS GRIMM, illustrated
by Noel Pocock
The Twelve Dancing Princesses and Other Tales
for Children, retold by SIR ARTHUR QUILLER-COUCH
and illustrated by Kay Nielsen
The Fairy Ring Series: Andersen’s Fairy Tales
illustrated by Dugald Stewart Walker—Thumbelisa
and Other Stories, The Mermaid and Other
Stories, and The Garden of Paradise and Other
Stories
KATE DOUGLAS WIGGIN’S and NORA A. SMITH’SThe Fairy Ring, with Children’s Bookplate, and
their Magic Casements: A Second Fairy Book
The Most Wonderful Pictures.
The series of classics illustrated in colour by
N. C. Wyeth includes:
The Scottish Chiefs, by JANE PORTER, edited by
KATE DOUGLAS WIGGIN and NORA A. SMITH Westward Ho! by CHARLES KINGSLEY The Last of the Mohicans, by J. FENIMORE
COOPER The Boy’s King Arthur, by SIDNEY LANIER The Black Arrow, by ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON Kidnapped, by ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON Treasure Island, by ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON The Mysterious Island, by JULES VERNE Poems of American Patriotism, chosen by
BRANDER MATTHEWS
Among the books illustrated by Howard Pyle
are:
The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood, of Great Renown in Nottinghamshire The Story of King Arthur and His Knights The Story of the Champions of the Round Table The Story of Sir Launcelot and His Companions The Story of the Grail and the Passing of Arthur
The two books illustrated by Kay Nielsen are:
The Twelve Dancing Princesses and Other Tales
for Children retold by SIR ARTHUR QUILLER-COUCH East of the Sun and West of the Moon: Old
Tales from the North
Here are two books illustrated by Maxfield
Parrish:
The Arabian Nights, edited by KATE DOUGLAS
WIGGIN and NORA A. SMITH Poems of Childhood, by EUGENE FIELD
Some other books with especially fine illustrations
in colour are:
A Child’s Garden of Verses, by ROBERT LOUIS
STEVENSON, illustrated by Jessie Willcox Smith
The Wind in the Willows, by KENNETH
GRAHAME, illustrated by Nancy Barnhart
LOUIS DODGE’SThe Sandman’s Forest and his The
Sandman’s Mountain, both illustrated by Paul
Bransom
MARY MAPES DODGE’SHans Brinker, or, The Silver
Skates, illustrated by George Wharton Edwards
FRANCES HODGSON BURNETT’SLittle Lord Fauntleroy,
with illustrations by Reginald B. Birch
MAUDE RADFORD WARREN’S and EVE DAVENPORT’STales Told by the Gander and their Adventures
in the Old Woman’s Shoe, both illustrated
by C. A. Federer
The History of Don Quixote de la Mancha,
edited by J. B. TREND and illustrated by Jean de
Bosschere
Robinson Crusoe, by DANIEL DEFOE, illustrated
by Noel Pocock
Stories from Hans Andersen, illustrated by Edmund
Dulac
Stories from the Arabian Nights, retold by
LAURENCE HOUSMAN, with pictures by Edmund
Dulac
The Sleeping Beauty and Other Fairy Tales from
the Old French, retold by SIR ARTHUR QUILLER-COUCH,
illustrated by Edmund Dulac
HAWTHORNE’SA Wonder Book, illustrated by
Arthur Rackham
ÆSOP’SFables, illustrated by Arthur Rackham
A Fairy Book, illustrated by Arthur Rackham
The Outdoor Life.
WARREN H. MILLER’SCamping Out, his The
Boy’s Book of Hunting and Fishing, and his Canoeing,
Sailing and Motorboating
The Boy Scouts’ Year Book for 1923 or earlier
years, as each annual contains outdoor information
of permanent interest
The Boy Scouts’ Book of Campfire Stories, and
the Boy Scouts’ Book of Stories, both edited by
FRANKLIN K. MATHIEWS
EDWARD CAVE’SBoy Scout’s Hike Book and his
The Boy’s Camp Book
ERNEST THOMPSON SETON’SThe Book of Woodcraft,
his Sign Talk, his Woodcraft Manual for
Boys, and his Woodcraft Manual for Girls
JEANNETTE MARKS’SVacation Camping for Girls
DAN BEARD’SShelters, Shacks and Shanties, his
Boat-Building and Boating: A Handy Book for
Beginners, his The Field and Forest Handy Book,
his The Jack of All Trades, his The Outdoor Handy
Book, and his The American Boy’s Handy Book
LINA and ADELIA B. BEARD’SRecreations for
Girls and their The American Girl’s Handy Book
Fiction.
JOSEPH A. ALTSHELER’S stories. Altsheler wrote
seven romances (The Last Rebel, etc.), eight books
in The Young Trailers Series, beginning with The
Young Trailers; three books in The Texan Series
(The Texas Star, etc.) and three miscellaneous Indian
stories (The Last of the Chiefs, The Quest of
the Four and Apache Gold) as well as two of The
Great West Series, The Great Sioux Trail and The
Lost Hunters. He wrote three stories dealing with
the World War, but his French and Indian War
Series (six books beginning with The Hunters of
the Hills) and his Civil War Series (eight books,
beginning with The Guns of Bull Run) are old
favourites
RALPH HENRY BARBOUR. School stories. Besides
fifteen not in any series and the Yardley Hall
stories (eight, beginning with Forward Pass) five
series of three books each—Hilton, Erskine, the
“Big Four,” Purple Pennant and Grafton
WILLIAM HEYLIGER. The author of High Benton
and High Benton, Worker. There are three
books in the Fairview Series, five in the St. Mary’s
Series, six in the Lansing Series, besides the extremely
popular books about Don Strong in the Boy
Scout Series—Don Strong of the Wolf Patrol, Don
Strong, Patrol Leader, and Don Strong, American
FRANK T. BULLEN’SThe Cruise of the Cachalot,
a classic for boys
RALPH D. PAINE’SA Cadet of the Black Star Line,
his The Fugitive Freshman, his The Head Coach,
his College Years, his Campus Days, his Sandy
Sawyer, Sophomore, his The Stroke Oar, and his
Sons of Eli
LAWRENCE PERRY’SFor the Game’s Sake, his The
Big Game, and his The Fullback (Fair Play Series)
DAN BEARD’SThe Black Wolf Pack
FRANK B. LINDERMAN’SLige Mounts: Free
Trapper
FRANCIS LYNDE’SThe Golden Spider
LEO E. MILLER’SAdrift on the Amazon, his In
the Tiger’s Lair, his The Hidden People and his
The Black Phantom
ARTHUR STANWOOD PIER’SThe Boys of Saint
Timothy’s
JULES VERNE’SAround the World in Eighty
Days, his A Journey to the Centre of the Earth, his
From the Earth to the Moon, and his Twenty
Thousand Leagues Under the Sea
RICHARD HARDING DAVIS’SThe Boy Scout and
Other Stories for Boys
JESSE LYNCH WILLIAMS’SThe Adventures of a
Freshman, his Princeton Stories, and his The
Day Dreamer (“The Stolen Story,” a newspaper
classic)
FRANCIS ROLT-WHEELER’S Young Journalists
Round the World Series—Plotting in Pirate Seas,
Hunting Hidden Treasure in the Andes, Heroes of
the Ruins, A Toreador of Spain, The Magic-Makers
of Morocco
STEWART EDWARD WHITE’SThe Adventures of
Bobby Orde
RUSSELL DOUBLEDAY’SCattle Ranch to College,
and his A Gunner Aboard the “Yankee”
O. HENRY’SThe Ransom of Red Chief and Other
O. Henry Stories for Boys
RALPH STOCK’SThe Cruise of the Dream Ship.
The hobo seafaring adventures of a boy. A fine
book, not nearly well enough known
LEWIS E. THEISS’SA Champion of the Foothills
CAROLINE DALE SNEDEKER’SThe Perilous Seat.
The story of a young Greek girl who saved her
country
JOSLYN GRAY’SElsie Marley, her Rosemary
Greenaway, and her newest tale, The Old Mary
Metcalf Place. Other Joslyn Gray stories are
Bouncing Bet, The January Girl, Rusty Miller,
and Kathleen’s Probation
MARGARET W. EGGLESTON’SFireside Stories for
Girls in Their Teens
E. F. BENSON’SDavid Blaize and his David
Blaize and the Blue Door
ISLA MAY MULLINS’SCaptain Pluck (founded on
fact)
MARION AMES TAGGART’SThe Annes, her Captain
Sylvia, her The Daughters of the Little Grey House
(The Little Grey House should be read first) and
her “Who Is Sylvia?” (a sequel to Captain Sylvia)
Mainly Historical.
FRANCIS ROLT-WHEELER’S Romance-History of
America Series—In the Days Before Columbus, The
Quest of the Western World, and The Coming of
the Peoples, each illustrated by C. A. Federer
NOAH BROOKS’SFirst Across the Continent. The
story of the Lewis and Clark expedition
CYRUS TOWNSEND BRADY’SIn the Wasp’s Nest
(War of 1812) and On the Old Kearsage (Civil
War)
SIDNEY DARK’SThe Child’s Book of England and
his The Child’s Book of France
BASIL MATHEWS’SThe Quest of Liberty: The
Adventures of the “Mayflower” Pilgrims
H. E. MARSHALL’SThis Country of Ours: The
Story of the United States
EVERETT T. TOMLINSON’SYoung People’s History
of the American Revolution, his Places Young
Americans Want to Know, his Fighters Young
Americans Want to Know, his The Story of General
Pershing, his Scouting on the Border, his Mysterious
Rifleman
Young Heroes of Our Navy, a series comprising
ROSSITER JOHNSON’SThe Hero of Manila, J.
BARNES’SCommodore Bainbridge, his With the Flag
in the Channel, his Midshipman Farragut, and his
The Hero of Erie (Commodore Perry); and MOLLY
ELLIOTT SEAWELL’SDecatur and Somers, her Paul
Jones, and her Little Jarvis, the Heroic Midshipman
Theodore Roosevelt’s Letters to His Children,
edited by JOSEPH BUCKLIN BISHOP
RICHARD HARDING DAVIS’SReal Soldiers of Fortune
and his With Both Armies in South Africa
A. HYATT VERRILL’SThe Real Story of the Pirate,
and his The Real Story of the Whaler
STEWART EDWARD WHITE’SDaniel Boone:
Wilderness Scout
BERNARD MARSHALL’SThe Torch Bearers, a new
novel of the time of Oliver Cromwell
RUSSELL DOUBLEDAY’SStories of Inventors
Inventions, Games, Plays, and the Fascinations
of Science.
A. FREDERICK COLLINS’SThe Book of the Microscope,
his The Book of Wireless Telegraph and
Telephone, his The Book of Stars, The Book of
Magic, The Book of Electricity, The Home Handy
Book, How to Fly, The Amateur Mechanic
FRANK M. RICH’SThe Jolly Tinker. How to
make all sorts of things out of the simplest materials,
how to mend shoes, repair books, make a
cardboard loom, etc.
RAY STANNARD BAKER’SThe Boy’s Book of Inventions
and his The Boy’s Second Book of Inventions
have already been mentioned
GILBERT T. PEARSON’SThe Bird Study Book
FRANK M. CHAPMAN’SBird Life, his Our Winter
Birds, his What Bird Is That? and his Handbook
of Birds of Eastern North America
Birds Worth Knowing, by NELTJE BLANCHAN;
Butterflies Worth Knowing, by CLARENCE M.
WEED; Flowers Worth Knowing (NELTJE BLANCHAN
adapted by ASA DON DICKINSON); and Trees
Worth Knowing, by JULIA ELLEN ROGERS
Game books by EDNA GEISTER—It Is To Laugh,
her Let’s Play, and her Fun Book
The Magic Sea Shell and Other Plays for Children,
by JOHN FARRAR
Three to Make Ready, by LOUISE AYRES GARNETT.
Plays
Ten Minutes by the Clock, by ALICE C. D. RILEY.
Plays
S. LYLE CUMMINS’SPlays for Children
Three Books for Parents.
FLORENCE V. BARRY’SA Century of Children’s
Books
ANNIE CARROLL MOORE’SNew Roads to Childhood,
and her Roads to Childhood: Views and Reviews
of Children’s Books. By the supervisor of
work with children in the New York Public Library.
10. The Man Called Ralph Connor
i
ONCE upon a time there was a Scotsman of Clan
Gordon, those Highlanders ye ken of Blair
Athol in the North Country, properly named with
a God-fearing name, Daniel, and a fine, stirring
preacher, too. Fire was on his lips but the flame
burning in his heart was tender and you should have
lived to hear him piping “Lochaber No More.” The
pibrochs sounded something beautiful as he played;
and when he stopped piping it was to begin relating
wonderful old stories; he kenned them all. Away
back in the 1840s it was he came out to Canada
with other folk from the North of Scotland and
fetched up in a Highland settlement in Ontario,
Glengarry, in the Indian Lands. Full twenty years
this man of God spent in Glengarry, taking a wife
from among the Robertsons. Her father had come
to New England first, moving on to Sherbrooke in
the Province of Quebec. I could tell you a deal
about her family; there was a cousin, Andrew
Murray, of Clairvaux, led the Dutch Reformed
South African Church; ye’ll have heard of Robertson
Smith and he was another cousin; the writer
M. M. Robertson was a sister. Mary Robertson
taught philosophy as a lass of twenty in Mount
Holyoke College in New England. They offered to
make her principal on the death of Mary Lyons and
she was duly considering for a while. She was of
the Robertsons of Aberdeen, ye ken, and twenty-two
years aged. But there was this young Highlander,
Daniel Gordon of Glengarry in the Indian
Lands, who was swaying congregations. Well, then,
she turned her small, straight back on the principalship
and married him, and went away from that
pleasant place and company and fine position that
stood waiting for her to live in the backwoods of
Canada, a rare wild parish with the railway twenty-five
miles off and a long journey to everywhere. She
was a remarkable woman. Daniel Gordon took her
to his home in the woods. In the year 1860 she
bore him a son; they named the boy Charles. The
laddie played about the square brick house with
wide verandas that stood in a natural park of pines
and maples, with a glebe of some twenty-four acres
and forest all about. Two miles by a path through
the woods took him to school in a clearing, and
two miles back. They played games in the shadows
of the pines. There was a rich green darkness and
a curious coolness and a curious warmth there for
them; the tops of the pines murmured like distant
bagpipes and everything smelt sharp and sweet.
On a day when the boy was eleven Daniel Gordon
went to sway another congregation in Western Ontario,
taking his wife and the boy along, for that
there were better schools for Charley to go to. What
with this, and high school in a neighbouring town,
the lad makes ready for Toronto and the University.
He didna do badly at the University, though he was
no sober-sided student. He sang in the glee club and
played quarterback at Rugby football in the champion
team for Western Ontario. Some honours in
classics he got and went on to the study of theology
at Knox College. He was not too strong in those
years and capturing scholarships and prizes in the
three years’ courses at Knox College did him no
good bodily. So then it was settled he should take
a year abroad, spent mostly in Edinburgh, where
he could walk along gay Princes Street and see the
grand sight of Castle Rock, or climb to Arthur’s
Seat and look over the Firth of Forth with its
speckle of green islands and white sails and the bare
country of the Kingdom of Fife, or pace slowly
down the Royal Mile to Holyrood, with every step
a threefold memory and an historic lesson. I’ll not
say this did him any harm, maybe, and what it
lacked in one way he made up on his return to Canada,
taking his brother and travelling deep into the
forest on Lake Nipissing, they seeing no other white
man for three months. To crown these journeyings
and to confirm the habit of health Charles Gordon
spent two more years at Banff. There, in the heart
of the Rockies, he climbed mountains and rejoiced
in wildness. “Yes, I ought to have been an Indian!”
he used to exclaim.
ii
He was ripe to receive his call at last, and it came.
It took him to a life of rough hardship as a missioner
in the North-West, all among lumbermen and
miners with a congregation to be gathered first, and
sore deeficult to sway in assembly. He came well-shod
to the work of treading out the harvest in the
Lord’s vineyard. He could go into the woods and
come out again, or face a man mad with drink, or
comfort a sick mother. A tall, slender, well set up
young missioner with no very much ruddiness of
complexion and a thoughtful, serious face that could
yet smile, for a’ that, with crinkles in the eye corners.
You would know him for Scots by his look,
but the rest is puir American. And he loved those
men among whom his work lay. When, along in
1894 and him just well into his thirties, he was
asked to a city church, he didna want to respond
favourably until he saw where his duty lay. Well,
then, he came to Winnipeg and to the ministry of
St. Stephen’s because it offered him the grand chance
to help those roughened men whose needs he knew.
Ye ken, perhaps, Mr. J. A. MacDonald of the Toronto
Globe newspaper. MacDonald had been a
classmate of Charley Gordon’s and a year or two
after Charley Gordon came as preacher to St.
Stephen’s, MacDonald was owner of a new little
paper called The Westminster and concerned with
Canadian Presbyterianism—a frank experiment.
Into the office of The Westminster dropped Charley
Gordon one fine day. He was in a great heat for
money to put into the foothills and the mountain
camps. They needed missions out there; I’m burning
up with the wish to write an article telling about
those men in the pines and along the upland lakes,
Charley Gordon tells MacDonald. I’ve facts and
figures. MacDonald was quick to say, if Charley
wanted to bring home his message to people and
loosen the purse-strings, he had a duty to write the
thing as a tale, paint a picture with lifelike figures
and a warm feeling running through it all. Gordon
minded himself of what he had seen and heard in
such good plenty; and he went home and sat down
to write a story of Christmas Eve among the lumbermen
in the Selkirk mountains. When he was
fair into it, he found himself carried back and away,
so much so that in reading it through after he didna
see what brother clergymen might make out of the
ringing speech of some of his characters. MacDonald
agreed, but sent to find out what name to
put on the story. Gordon invented a name, Cannor,
out of the first letters of “Canada” and “North-West.”
MacDonald picked up the reply telegram
and snorted disdain. Cannor, he commented, what
sort of a name is that! I’ll make it Connor. And
where’s a first name? Frank? Fred? Chris? No.
Ralph? Aye, we’ll make it that. This was the
birth and christening together, ye’ll ken. The tale
of the lumbermen’s Christmas Eve in the mountains
was later to become the first chapter of the novel,
Black Rock, the first novel by Ralph Connor, that
was read everywhere.
iii
I’ll not have to be telling you what it was in
Black Rock won so many readers for Ralph Connor.
Humour and pathos are bound up in the lives the
young minister of St. Stephen’s was writing about;
ye could lay hold quickly of his sympathy for those
men who were in some ways as helpless as bairns
and were half-brutalised by their work and surroundings.
It’s the effect they have on each other,
too. Them picking up Black Rock to read were
struck with something fresh and wild and clean,
withal. They sensed a tenderness about the feeling
of the story, like heather softening the bare hillside,
and more than a morsel of the everlasting hope in
which men endure hard and lonely toils. The same
held true of the books that followed Black Rock;
for there had to be other books. Ye mind The Sky
Pilot and The Man From Glengarry and The Foreigner
and Corporal Cameron and The Patrol of the
Sun Dance Trail. Take The Foreigner. On the
edge of Winnipeg, Charles Gordon found a Settlement
of Slavs—Ruthenians, Russians, Galicians
and who not. They lived in a grim little collection
of huts, a dozen in a room, all huddled up, drinking
and dirty and violent; and on them was still the
shadow of tyrannies in the Old Country. Drinking
and dirty and violent with a violence dark and beautiful,
Charles Gordon found them. Aye, he found
the huts and the men, and Ralph Connor that was
in him found a story. Ralph Connor took the splendid
young heart in Kalmar, the son of a nihilist,
and brought it to fight its way out of the ruck of
aliens and make for the new country beyond the
Saskatchewan, where there is prairie and where the
lakes lie on the surface of the prairie like jewels
on a woman’s breasts. Then, in Corporal Cameron,
was Connoring the first grand tale of the North-West
Mounted Police, by a man who kenned them,
as followers in his tracks scarce can be said to. A
richt fine love story is this of the lad who was born
in a Scottish glen and came to ride out in the Canadian
blizzards; it’s furthered in The Patrol of
the Sun Dance Trail, which makes use of the half-breed
and Indian rebellion of Louis Riel. But
there’s a muckle I love in the book besides the adventure—Cameron
and his gold-haired, plucky wife
and the hesitant wonder of the first fine feeling of
the lover. It fashes me how a man says what’s
down in the hearts of such a many other men and
women. Give me to understand how it’s done!
Here’s the Reverend Charles Gordon dwelling this
quarter century and longer in Winnipeg, building
up St. Stephen’s and seeing it transformed from a
plain chapel of wood into a handsome church of
stone, with a church house where the young men
without homes can live, and where there’s sewing
and amateur acting and films and bowling every
night of the week. In the daytime the Reverend
Gordon will maybe attend court to help get some
boy straightened out and become a guardian to him;
or he’ll be at meetings in his church where revolutionary
agitators are spouting the downfall of all
institutions and then voting thanks to the preacher
because, as they put it, he has given us an absolutely
square deal. And after supper you would
find him in his home at evening prayers with the
three youngsters who appeared to enjoy their devotions.
There’s no stiltedness in the man at all. He
reads from Scripture concerning Paul taking
Timothy with him to learn what were the problems
of that day. And he closes the book on his
finger to remark what a sensible, canny thing for
Paul to do. Some of our theological seminaries,
adds the father, shut a man out from contact with
life, shut him up with professors, and when he
comes out of his cloister he canna recognise a social
problem if it walks up to him on the street. The
trouble with me, he finishes, when I had gotten out
of the seminary.
But he’s generous to a fault sore in a son of Scots
folk. If his right hand is earning moneys with
a pen, his left hand is spending lavish and free.
There’s his salary as minister to the kirk goes flowing
out several times over in gifts and helpings to
people. I mind the year quite long back when the
Presbyterian General Assembly of Canada was
meeting in Toronto and Doctor the Reverend Gordon
put down $10,000 so every missionary minister
and his wife in the breadth of Canada might attend
the General Assembly, expenses paid. Some
of these men and their wives hadn’t been out of the
woods in years. Ralph Connor knew what this
meant.
iv
Then, when the Great War came thundering, our
sky pilot stood up and said Canada must send a
half million men. Many scoffed at him; but he
was right, and we sent the half million and over
sixty thousand didna come back. From St.
Stephen’s there was an enlistment of close on four
hundred, including the minister and five members
of the Session. The dominie went in the spring of
1915 after the congregation had confirmed his leave
of absence—Major Charles W. Gordon, chaplain to
the Forty-third Battalion Cameron Highlanders of
Canada. Many St. Stephen’s men were enrolled in
this battalion and one of the members of the Session,
Robert McDonald Thomson, was their first colonel.
It was the Western Front—from the Ypres Salient,
Sanctuary Wood, the bloodshed of the Somme and
back again to Arras. In that time Ralph Connor
saw the regiment shrunk from full strength to two
officers and sixty-five men. He knelt down amid
the roar of guns and the hailing of machine gun
bullets to do last rites for his own men and comrades.
Among them was Colonel Thomson. On the
eighth day of October, 1916, the outfit stormed the
Regina Trench on the Somme. Unable to advance,
they wouldna retreat. So they died where they
stood.
v
The Major and The Sky Pilot in No Man’s Land
are books ye’ll verra well recollect; likewise the
novel of twa years back, To Him That Hath.
Since ye hanna read it, it’s the new novel from the
pen of Ralph Connor, I’ll just speak a word of to ye.
He calls it The Gaspards of Pine Croft and explains
it is “a romance of the Windermere Valley.”
A story of the life and moulding of Paul Gaspard,
it is. Here’s a mon with two powerful strains
mixed and fighting for mastery of him. From his
mither, Paul inherits a rare sense of the presence
of God; his father gifted him with a fine artist
sense, and a bounding spirit, a passion for life to
the full. The clash of the two men in the boy grows
with him to manhood, so that after the death of
his mither he stands between two women, who
beckon different ways. Then when a great decision
is put before him the mon takes upon himself a
burden and a responsibility that test him body and
soul. ’Tis a life and death struggle set in the grand
country Ralph Connor makes his own. There’s the
valley of the Windermere before you with the
Gaspard ranch, Pine Croft, flanked on one side by
a great bend of the Columbia River and on the
other by a mountain wall of virgin forest. In this
mysterious wilderness, the figures of Indians do
come and go, touching the lives of the white people
with disaster, with dread—with an unco beauty as
well.
Books by Ralph Connor
Beyond the Marshes
1898 Black Rock
1899 The Sky Pilot Ould Michael
1901 The Man from Glengarry
1902 Glengarry School Days Breaking the Record
1904 The Prospector The Pilot of Swan Creek Gwen
1906 The Doctor of Crow’s Nest The Life of Dr. James Robertson
1909 The Foreigner; A Tale of Saskatchewan The Angel and the Star The Dawn by Galilee The Recall of Love
1912 Corporal Cameron of the North-West Mounted Police: A Tale of the MacLeod Trail
1914 The Patrol of the Sun Dance Trail
1917 The Major
1919 The Sky Pilot in No Man’s Land
1921 To Him That Hath
1923 The Gaspards of Pine Croft
Sources on Ralph Connor
Ralph Connor, the Well-Beloved. Booklet published
in 1914 by George H. Doran Company.
Now out of print.
Silver Jubilee, 1895-1920, of St. Stephen’s, Winnipeg.
Booklet published by the congregation of
St. Stephen’s Presbyterian Church, Winnipeg,
Manitoba.
II. Here, There and Everywhere
i
IN his new book, The Humanizing of Knowledge,
the author of that fascinating study, The Mind
in the Making, James Harvey Robinson, says:
“Personally I have reached the conclusion, after
many years of teaching, that one should choose for
instruction, whether one be dealing with young or
old, some phase of human interest rather than some
field of scientific investigation”—and he goes on
with force and plainness to point out the defect of
an educational scheme in which knowledge is imparted
by going in and out of great numbers of
pigeonholes. He is really pleading for methods of
instruction that shall take account of the ordinary
man’s interest in his world, and shall proceed by
the natural process of mental associations instead
of by artificial and arbitrary tetherings to the post
of this and that “subject.” Seldom has the difficulty
been put with more brevity, simplicity and
general sweetness of temper, or in a way to give
such decent courage to individual self-respect. “We
are not many of us interested in isolated scientific
facts of any kind. That species of interest, as we
have seen, is reserved for the few. But all of us
are open to the effects of such new knowledge as
gets under our skins. And the great art is not to
exhibit our own insight and learning but really to
influence those whom we are aiming to influence.”
There could be no better text or opening for a chapter
devoted to books of many varieties, inasmuch
as books have always taken, except where restricted
by school formulas, the lines of human interests
and the path of some natural association of ideas.
In this sense, though teaching may need to be
humanised, knowledge has never been without its
humanisation. A James Harvey Robinson cannot
write about science without being led into the absorbing
history of the mind that is slowly achieving
science. A Camille Flammarion, discussing astronomy,
finds it above all things natural to relate
his knowledge with man’s religious ideas. An
L. P. Jacks, analysing religious doubts, moves
directly over the border of so-called psychology into
the sphere of conduct and behaviour, because the
answer lies over there. A George Santayana employs
poetry to state those portions of his philosophy
which prose can scarcely embody with sufficient
expressiveness; bases criticism on his philosophy
and distils or re-distils philosophical ideas from all
the varieties of his learning.
To take M. Flammarion, for example. His new
work, Dreams of an Astronomer, could without any
essential inaccuracy be styled “A Humanisation of
Astronomy.” Here is a book produced in this
French scientist’s eighty-first year, at an age where
“isolated scientific facts” had lost all fanciful
meanings and were seen only in their warm and
present human significance. The point with M.
Flammarion was not that we live on a poor little
world in a vast universe composed of worlds within
worlds and flaming suns and revolving planets, nor
that this universe so immense is but an item of
larger immensities. The point was in the significance
of these facts to the heart and mind of a
man or a woman. What does it mean as regards
our attempt to know God? In what perspective
does it place our aspirations and our efforts toward
what we sometimes call “righteousness”? Flammarion
gives the richness of his physical knowledge
in untechnical language; in words that summon the
imagination he constructs pen pictures of other
worlds than ours. That we may have the value of
comparison, he describes Venus and Mars—the
latter possibly inhabited by creatures millions of
years ahead of us in their development. This moving
and inspiring book ends with a sentence that
might serve as the quiet challenge of science to much
of philosophy and religion. Says M. Flammarion:
“Let us not be personal, like infants or the aged,
who see only their own room, let us know how to
live in the infinite and in the eternal.”
But this lofty idea needs translation into the
terms of our finite existence and our character of
religious beliefs. It finds it in such a book as L. P.
Jacks’s Religious Perplexities. Like The Humanizing
of Knowledge, this is a slender book that can
be read through in about an hour and it is equally
a book that is likely to influence a lifetime. It
is beside my point that Professor Jacks is one of
the greatest living philosophers and religionists;
but it is a fact of the highest relevance that he
writes as no one writing on these subjects has
written since William James. The same power to
pierce to fundamental questions—and answer them;
the same lucidity of thought and expression are
characteristic of the two men. Jacks exhibits the
same tolerance of the forms of religious belief; and
it is only after a discussion of “Religious Perplexities
in General” that he closes with a talk about
“Perplexity in the Christian Religion.” He says:
“Far be it from me to set up an exclusive claim for
Christianity. Anyone who does that goes a long
way towards forfeiting his title to be called a Christian.
Let each of us look for truth where it is most
accessible and where it speaks the language he best
understands.” He begins with the two ultimate
questions that man asks himself: “Why are we
here?” followed by, “Why am I—I, and not
John Jones or James Smith—here and now?”
The answer to the first is the need of the One to
differentiate itself into the Many, proving its universality
and its power to integrate and raise up
the good. But, he shows, the answer to the second
question is in the conduct of the individual. Insofar
as I by my courage in the face of life justify my
particular existence, I supply the reason why myself,
rather than Jones or Smith, exists in my place,
here and now. Faith is not a new faculty added
to us, it is simply our reason grown courageous. As
Carlyle repeated, we all must answer the alternative:
“Wilt thou be a hero or a coward?” Professor
Jacks adds: “No philosophy can relieve
us from the responsibility of having to make
that choice”—and religion, telling us our choice
must be the heroic one, strengthens us in making
it.
It is religion, I think, that George Santayana
represents—Santayana who contrasts for me with
that rooted countryman of his, Miguel de Unamuno.
I have a love for both, the one tenacious
of his soil and its traditions, the other early detached,
flung into the New England of Harvard
and William James, now lodged in Paris, and
always with his roots feeding orchid-like on the air.
It is inevitable that one like Santayana should bear
his blossom in poetry and criticism and his fruit in
philosophy-religion, or religious philosophy. Thus
he calls his Scepticism and Animal Faith, “an introduction
to a system of philosophy,” but it is so only
in the literal sense probably necessary to secure the
proper recognition from a too unimaginative world.
The book, which has a charm unbecoming a philosophical
overture, can be read independently of
the volumes that are to follow it; but who reads it
may be trusted to put independence on one side and
“follow, follow.” Santayana as poet is possibly
matter to consider in a later chapter of our book,
but since, as he says in the preface to his Poems,
their subject “is simply my philosophy in the making,”
we should be privileged to a passing consideration
here. “I see no reason why a philosopher
should be puzzled. What he sees he sees; of the
rest he is ignorant; and his sense of this vast ignorance
(which is his natural and inevitable condition)
is a chief part of his knowledge and of his
emotion. Philosophy is not an optional theme that
may occupy him on occasion. It is his only possible
life, his daily response to everything”—call it
religion, if you please, and regard its expression:
O world, thou choosest not the better part!
It is not wisdom to be only wise,
And on the inward vision close the eyes,
But it is wisdom to believe the heart.
Columbus found a world, and had no chart,
Save one that faith deciphered in the skies;
To trust the soul’s invisible surmise
Was all his science and his only art.
Our knowledge is a torch of smoky pine
That lights the pathway but one step ahead
Across a void of mystery and dread.
Bid, then, the tender light of faith to shine
By which alone the mortal heart is led
Unto the thinking of the thought divine.
And to all who care for fine intellectualism
neither arid of inspiration nor robbed of beauty and
emotion I commend Santayana in all his books,
those named and, of course, The Life of Reason,
Winds of Doctrine, The Sense of Beauty, and
Character and Opinion in the United States and the
Soliloquies as well. For those unacquainted with
the man, Little Essays Drawn from the Works of
George Santayana, by Logan Pearsall Smith, may
offer the readiest approach.
ii
The task to which James Harvey Robinson calls
us has already been undertaken with the highest
success by himself and some others. Among these
has from the first been Edwin E. Slosson who now,
with Otis W. Caldwell, the botanist and educator
of Columbia University, has edited an admirable
volume, Science Remaking the World. This book
is so good and represents so intelligent a collaboration,
that I hope it is only the forerunner of a
number of similar volumes. In the dual editorship,
Dr. Caldwell’s contribution was his working familiarity
with every field of modern science while
Dr. Slosson lent his magic touch of the born populariser.
The fifteen chapters, eleven of which are
contributed by specialists in various fields, deal
directly along the average person’s lines of interest
with such subjects as gasoline power, coal tar products,
the modern idea of the atom, what we know
of “infantile paralysis,” our present knowledge of
tuberculosis, the lengthening of human life, the
world’s health, botanical science, evolution, warfare
against insects, forestation, the chemistry and
economy of food, and those two basic foods, bread
and the potato. Dr. Caldwell writes the general
opening chapter and the chapter on lengthening
human life with its special reference to Louis
Pasteur’s work; as was desirable in view of the
great popular success of his Creative Chemistry,
Dr. Slosson contributes the discussions of gasoline
power and of the miracles wrought from coal
tar.
Our quest shuttles back and forth between the
discoveries of man and man the discoverer. At
every stage we have to consider not only what man
has gained in the way of knowledge but his potentialities
in respect of all knowledge. That is why
we have such a succession of books as Madison
Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race, those books
by Lothrop Stoddard which are brought to attention
in Chapter 22 of this volume, and, now,
Roland B. Dixon’s The Racial History of Man.
The professor of anthropology at Harvard treats
impressively and from a broad point of view the
whole question of race. His account of race distribution
and historical development is divided
geographically. Beginning with Europe and a general
outline of its racial history, he then takes up
the separate countries or areas. In the same way
he deals with Africa, Asia, Oceania, North and
South America. His interesting conclusions, in
some respects original and without the dogmatism
that vitiates much writing on the subject, are given
in a final chapter. But the best part is that this
book is simply the first in a group of probably ten
volumes, each to be written by a leading American
authority, which is to describe, in the light of the
latest investigation and discovery, the formation of
worlds, the evolution of species, and the emergence
and development of man.
Such books are desperately needed, to resume
James Harvey Robinson’s argument, if science is
to save itself. Such is the present situation that
“if no precautions are taken to bridge the gap between
scientific knowledge and popular prejudice it
may grow so wide that the researcher himself may
be engulfed.” It would not be the first time in
human history when light was swallowed up in
darkness. How dense that darkness can be, how
persistent, how ironical and, perhaps, pathetic may
be learned from the slightest perusal of Dr. James
J. Walsh’s astonishing and engrossing new book,
called Cures. This is a history of new remedies of
every sort in all ages which have cured for a while
and then have failed. It will scarcely surprise us,
although it may make us rather uncomfortable, to
know that not Europe with its ancient and superstitious
peoples but modern America has supplied
the greatest number of cure delusions. Dr. Walsh
puts the explanation on a charitable ground:
“Americans are more enterprising and as a result
we have had ever so many more successful discoveries
of new”—but less permanently successful—“remedies.”
The subject is not without its
humorous aspects. Insofar as Dr. Walsh has occasion
to treat of some forms of curing which are still
much adhered to, with or without correlated religious
beliefs, his book treads on live and resentful
toes. As a Catholic avoiding the discussion of
Lourdes and other shrines, he invites reprisals; as
a physician of very distinguished service and high
standing, he is well-qualified to counter them. But
aside from any possible controversy, what an amazing
history of human credulity and ignorance he
exposes—Dowie, rattlesnake oil, magnetic iron,
metallic tractors, sympathetic powders, hypnotism,
mesmerism, electric belts, plasters, pads, chest protectors,
psychoanalysis and spiritualistic healing
along with the various forms of “New Thought”
come under review. It will be observed that as a
rule Dr. Walsh gives credit for cures to even the
most impossible notion or contraption—at first. A
cure is a cure, perhaps only the more so if the actual
curative agent is suggestion.
Suggestion! Is it possible that, on a subject so
bedevilled, a book could now appear of genuine
usefulness, sanity and popular value? Personally
I should have inclined to answer emphatically,
“No!” But I cannot, for the book is before me.
Dr. Louis E. Bisch, a physician practising in New
York, lecturing on psychology at Columbia and
directing the treatments given in mental and nervous
cases at the large sanitarium in the North
Carolina mountains, has been known to me hitherto
by his Your Inner Self—without exception the best
popular account of psychoanalysis and modern
psychology I have ever seen. Now he has written
The Conquest of Self, in which he expresses with
the same directness and accuracy all that body of
actual truth which the “How to Succeed” books
build into such amazing forms of lies and nonsense.
There is, of course, a certain power of accomplishment
in each of us; there is a general direction for
each of us to take; there are personal obstacles to
overcome, and there is a power of progression to be
developed. A better comprehension of one’s self,
as of others, can definitely be arrived at. All these
facts Dr. Bisch translates into practical detail and
illustrates with concrete instances, avoiding the
claptrap with which the whole subject is now so
heavily overloaded. In that general enterprise of
the humanisation of knowledge to which (I hope)
we are all fully committed, such a book as The
Conquest of Self has a special merit; for where
ignorance is thickest, it lights a clear and modest
path, and where pseudo-science has done and is
doing the greatest havoc, it puts truth in armour
for the hardest part of a difficult journey.
iii
If, as some contend, the purpose of fiction is entertainment—an
assertion we need not either
attempt to refute nor deny—then the mark of good
fiction is that, while perhaps entertaining us, it does
something else. And about the “something else”
I should think we need not be narrow in definitions.
Maybe the entertaining novel we are reading adds
its unobtrusive item to our understanding of this
or that; maybe it tunes up our emotional natures.
Or it may accomplish its bye-purpose in other directions.
We may or may not be conscious of the
additional result, or, if conscious of it, we may
continue (perhaps wisely) to read for the sole purpose
of being entertained. I do not believe one
should read fiction with the something else in mind,
nor, in a brief account of some new novels, would I
attempt to suggest what the something else—differing,
it is likely, with the individual reader—may
turn out to be. If one asks me for bread, I will not
offer him a loaf of vitamins, but palatable bread
from which his body may take the elements it
pleases.
For examples, you may derive from John
Buchan’s Midwinter your clearest idea of Dr. Samuel
Johnson, or your greatest knowledge about the
affections of a young lady; your own mind will
satisfy its proper need. From Compton Mackenzie’s
The Altar Steps and its sequel, Parson’s
Progress, certain temperaments gain religious and
ecclesiastical satisfactions. The modern, intimate
taste for sensory impulses can be gratified in reading
John Dos Passos’s unusual novel, Streets of Night;
just as the correlative instinct for a fresh and daring
idealism is fed by such a fine first novel as
Cyril Hume’s The Wife of the Centaur. Arnold
Bennett’s Riceyman Steps, with its story of a young
charwoman who works for a miserly bookseller and
his wife, renews the heart in its assurance of our
common humanity, and offers the rich nourishment
which rejoiced us in The Old Wives’ Tale. And
so it goes with fiction.
We think of Brand Whitlock now as the author
of Belgium, but a further thought recalls him, and
with pleasure, as a writer of fiction. His new
novel, J. Hardin & Son, was planned ten years and
more ago and discussed with the late William Dean
Howells, whose interest in it was keen. The actual
writing had begun in the summer of 1914 at a small
country place near Brussels when the catastrophe
of war began its pre-emption upon all of the
American Minister’s time and energy. Except for
intervals of thinking about it and occasional notes,
Mr. Whitlock could do nothing but protect the
manuscript on journeyings to and fro—until the
end of 1918, when, after the armistice, he resumed
writing as opportunity offered. The book was
progressing in earnest at Biarritz and Spa in 1922,
and was completed in New York in the spring of
1923. Mr. Howells’s interest will be understood
when it is explained that J. Hardin & Son takes
place in a little Ohio town. The story begins when
Paul Hardin, the son, is ten and accompanies him to
middle age—perhaps one should say to that point
in or at the beginning of middle age where, as with
Sinclair Lewis’s Babbitt, a man’s character takes its
final determining shape in some act or decision
which controls the rest of his life. For Paul Hardin
this moment comes when he recognises one of the
buggies made forty years before by his father, takes
hold of one of the spokes and finds it as solid, as
resistant as on the day it was made. Paul had
hardly liked his father, whose sternly-held and
sternly-expressed views and whose passion for moral
reform in the shape of prohibition seemed like a
life-long and perverse obstinacy, embittering all the
preludes to affection, sympathy or even understanding.
Yet now! Something comes out of that spoke,
something out of his father’s life that settles his
behaviour toward the two women who are for him
to deal with in regard to himself. Mr. Whitlock
has aimed, however, at the reconstruction of a
period in American life. His momentous personal
problem in the life of Paul Hardin is simply the
foreground for a study of American ideas in a
certain kind of community in the years within his
own recollection, say from 1880 on pretty well into
our century. Over a hundred characters, many of
them of more than passing importance, are involved
in the extremely varied but entirely naturalistic
incidents of the novel.
J. Hardin & Son, the work of an American at
fifty, makes a contrast with the work of a Norwegian
of fifty, the age at which Jonas Lie wrote
his The Family at Gilje. The Norwegian novelist,
whose story is just offered in a careful translation,
uses a much simpler scheme. His tale opens with
a picture of a home in the mountains of Norway
where a father and mother are anxious to get their
children married off. It ends when each child has
solved his or her problem. If environment conquers
in one child, individuality is sure to come out on
top in another. Jonas Lie’s book, I am told, makes
Norwegians feel that they are living again the
scenes of early life; and at the same time the novel
is full of the most modern ideas about marriage,
the home and the management of children, introduced
not by main strength and the hazard of
fictional illusion but subtly, by an artist who shared
Ibsen’s supply of “social dynamite” but whose
artistry was paramount. Lie is called a realist, as,
I suppose, Bojer and most of the Scandinavians
would be (except Jens Jacobsen in Marie Grubbe);
but what is the white magic in these writers of the
white snow-countries that makes their realism so
unfailingly poetic? Is it indigenous? Cannot we
acquire it here in America? Shall we exile our
artists to Canada, whence now comes little but the
worn-out stories of strong men and their uniform
primitiveness with women?
I do not know the answers to these questions, nor
do you; but I do know that certain writers are
simpatico in certain provinces of society—Frank
Swinnerton, for example, in the stratum whence he
drew his Nocturne and his Coquette and in the
somewhat different middle-class level on which we
meet the characters of his new story, Young Felix.
Here is a satisfactory representative English novel
in the mode called realism to contrast with our
American and our Norwegian. I say “contrast”—for
I don’t think comparisons will get us very far.
What we are better employed in doing, in my opinion,
is a species of addition rather than subtraction;
we shall find a difference in the attitude as well as
the art of Brand Whitlock, Jonas Lie, and Frank
Swinnerton. Is not each worth our while? I think
so. I think such a novel as Jay William Hudson’s
Nowhere Else in the World is worth the while of
most readers, who may, however, be a bit puzzled
at first to discover how different it is from his Abbé
Pierre. Mr. Hudson may possibly have written the
Great Chicago Novel as Carl Sandburg is sometimes
thought to have written the great Chicago hymn or
chant. At least, his Nowhere Else in the World is
in its essence apocalyptic. Stephen Kent, who had
been enchanted by Paris after a youthful rebellion
against Chicago and its blatant commercialism, lives
to look upon the city of his birth as “like Rodin’s
‘Thinker,’ primitive, powerful, with mighty sinews,”
as “the spiritual capital of America,” as a
place where he and others will join in “moulding,
not paintings and statues, but a civilisation destined
to be the summit of all art, of all dreams.” There
is incidentally in this tense story a competent picture
of American academic life which will cause
squirmings. Mr. Hudson’s knowledge of American
colleges is derived at first hand.
Much first hand knowledge, I happen to know,
has gone into the writing of George Looms’s second
novel, John-No-Brawn. The action of this rather
terrible but certainly impressive piece of fiction
takes place in Louisville, Kentucky, the author’s
home town, and in and near Denver, Colorado.
The book is one of an intensity that has already
occasioned extremely divergent opinions. The story
is that of a sick man, an indeterminate character
trapped by the horrible and inescapable fact of
disease. He comes to the conclusion that he is a
hopeless drag on his young wife. Against the warnings,
protests and threats of doctor and nurse, he
walks out of the hospital. “They watched him near
the stairway, saw him reel slightly and then reach
out his hand and take hold of the banister—saw
him steady himself. He paused for a moment ...
and then he passed around the partition corner, out
of sight.” Such an ending is exalting or deadly in
its depressiveness, as you please; just as the story itself
is a thing of magnificence or of utter drabness.
Like the powerful war novel by Thomas Boyd,
Through the Wheat, a violent reaction in one direction
or another is to be expected of the reader.
It is probably an advantage in Mr. Boyd’s novel
over Dos Passos’s Three Soldiers that Through the
Wheat is almost entirely a story of fighting in the
front line. All agree that this was war, at least,
and something is gained at the outset by the setting
aside of various prejudices and preconceptions.
Through the Wheat, far more than Three Soldiers,
contrasts with high effectiveness with Henri Barbusse’s
Under Fire. Again may I plead that if the
two novels, the French and the American, are to be
entered in a fight by rounds, there can and should
be no decision. Through the Wheat is a wonderful
thing to have been plucked in Belleau Wood,
at Soissons and Saint Mihiel by a boy not yet
twenty.
While Mr. Whitlock is going back of our day
for his Middle Western picture, Meredith Nicholson,
slightly his senior, has been busy with the immediacy
not only of the present day but the very
hour. Mr. Nicholson’s new novel, The Hope of
Happiness, like its predecessor, Broken Barriers,
reckons with a social life in which, if they have not
been entirely swept aside, American standards of
conduct have been very much altered. The young
woman who drinks too hopelessly much is put before
us, but the essential story is one of a situation between
father and unacknowledged son with the
probable complications of men’s business and
women’s love. There is an ability of characterisation
and a temper and evenness in the writing which
make the reader feel that Mr. Nicholson writes for
a much ampler purpose than would be served by a
novel of changing manners and enlarged social
license. These are mere appurtenances of the story
he has to tell.
Not to have a story to tell is to forfeit the best
claim to consideration at the hands of most readers
of fiction; and among those Americans who have
never made the forfeiture I would have no hesitation
in naming Irvin S. Cobb. The award of the
O. Henry Memorial Prize for 1922 to the title
story in Cobb’s Snake Doctor and Other Stories
seems to me more or less of an irrelevance; Cobb
has written so many capital stories and the award,
if it had then existed, might so easily have gone to
him years ago. The tales collected in Snake Doctor
and Other Stories exhibit, perhaps, a greater variety
than some of the earlier collections, and there is a
Judge Priest story without which, I am certain, a
majority of Cobb’s readers would consider the book
incomplete. “Snake Doctor” itself has been criticised
as being altogether mechanical. My suggestion
to those who advance that criticism would be
conveyed in the form of a question, or two questions:
Did they get no thrill from reading the
story? And if they did, was that thrill a purely
mechanical effect? For the point is not whether
the thing producing an effect is a mechanism, but
the nature of the effect itself. Nothing is more
mechanical than the theatre, but a good play is not
made the less art thereby. Actors, you may say,
or acting; but a scene has been “made” or destroyed
more than once by that utterly mechanical detail,
the stage setting.... If as has sometimes been
predicted, a machine will be invented to produce
upon us all the effects of good fiction, we shall none
of us quarrel with the inventor nor will anyone try
to destroy the device unless it be our fictioners. In
the meantime, I advise no one to neglect them, lest
the day of the obvious and unconcealed machine
never arrive.
iv
To blaze a trail for the reader through the rich
forest of books educational, philosophical, scientific,
and withal “popular” is no easy task. I have not
attempted to do more than put down the titles of
some new and recent “general” books, with the
authors, and sometimes a note upon the volume.
But should these not be classified? Dear reader, if
you will give me the classification of the things you
are interested in, I will classify the books....
Christ or Mars? by WILL IRWIN. A passionate
but documented indictment. Mr. Irwin says we do
not want peace hard enough; the mood of man must
be changed before peace can come about. He believes
it can be done. “We are trying to hide in
squirrel-holes from God. And the church, which
purports to interpret to our world His intentions,
is hiding too.”
NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER’SBuilding the American
Nation is a series of lectures on Samuel Adams,
Benjamin Franklin, Washington, Hamilton, Madison,
Jefferson, John Marshall, Webster, Jackson and
Lincoln.
The Ideals of Theodore Roosevelt, by EDWARD
H. COTTON. The book deals especially with Roosevelt’s
religious beliefs and his creed as expressed
in a life of action. Theodore Roosevelt’s sister,
Corinne Roosevelt, writes the preface.
The Spirit of Islam, by SYED AMEER ALI. Recognised
as the one authoritative work in English
for use in Moslem centres of instruction. Of especial
interest in connection with Lothrop Stoddard’s
The New World of Islam.
Man and the Attainment of Immortality, by
JAMES Y. SIMPSON. After a careful outline of
biological evolution, the author interprets Christianity
as the most important stage in the evolution
which, from being physical, is tending more and
more to become a mental and spiritual process.
G. STANLEY HALL’SJesus, the Christ, in the Light
of Psychology, an interpretation of what we know
of Christ in the light of present-day psychological
knowledge, is now procurable in one volume.
A new and useful introduction to the study of
philosophy is JOSEPH A. LEIGHTON’SThe Field of
Philosophy.
JAMES HARVEY ROBINSON’SThe Humanizing of
Knowledge, discussed above, is one of the volumes
of the Workers’ Bookshelf series, books primarily
planned for use in American trades union colleges
but of varying general interest. Other books in the
series are Joining in Public Discussion, The Control
of Wages, Women in the Labour Movement, etc.
(by various authors).
The Greek View of Life, by G. LOWES DICKINSON,
a book of charm and permanence, should possibly
rather be assigned to Chapter 15 of this book.
The Making of the Western Mind, by F. MELIAN
STAWELL and F. S. MARVIN. A short survey of the
leading elements of the European cultural inheritance
from the days of classical Greece to our own
day.
Suggestion and Mental Analysis, by WILLIAM
BROWN. Takes into account Coué and Badouin and
psychoanalysis, and culminates in an exposition of
Bergson’s philosophy.
The Dominant Sex, by MATHILDE and MATHIAS
VAERTING, translated by Eden and Cedar Paul.
Argues that there are no distinctively “masculine”
traits but that the traits so-called have been characteristic
of either sex when dominant in a particular
society; with evidence to support the theory.
The Mechanism and Physiology of Sex Determination,
by RICHARD GOLDSCHMIDT, translated by
W. J. Dakin. Remarkable breeding experiments
carried out with insects; intersexuality; a subsection
deals with man. A book of importance to biologists.
How to Sing, by LUISA TETRAZZINI. Practical
advice by the great coloratura singer.
The Art of the Prima Donna, by FREDERICK H.
MARTENS. Discussions by Bori, Calve, Easton,
Farrar, Galli-Curci, Hempel, Homer, Jeritza,
Schumann-Heink and others are the feature of the
book.
Public Speaking, by FRANK H. KIRKPATRICK.
Those interested in this subject will probably want
also ALFRED DWIGHT SHEFFIELD’SJoining in Public
Discussion.
The Process and Practice of Photo-Engraving, by
H. O. GROESBECK, JR. There has hitherto been no
handbook and manual.
Construction of the Small House, by H. VANDERVOORT
WALSH. For the architect and the layman
alike.
As an example of the finest type of book in one
of many special fields, there may be mentioned
ARTHUR T. BOLTON’SThe Architecture of Robert
and James Adam, in two volumes with about 700
illustrations, folio size, $60.00.
The Book of Building and Interior Decorating,
edited by REGINALD T. TOWNSEND. Practical advice
from experts.
Interior Decoration, by FRANK ALVAH PARSONS.
A standard work.
The Psychology of Dress: Life Expressed in
Clothes, by FRANK ALVAH PARSONS, is a history of
costume made still more interesting by illustrations.
The Amateur’s Book of the Garden Series, edited
by LEONARD BARRON, offers:
The Vegetable Garden, by ADOLPH KRUHM Planning Your Garden, by W. S. ROGERS Lawns, by LEONARD BARRON House Plants, by PARKER T. BARNES The Flower Garden, by IDA D. BENNETT
For the owner of the greenhouse there is Gardening
Under Glass, by F. F. ROCKWELL; SYDNEY
MITCHELL’SGardening in California is a guide for
the amateur on the Pacific slope; and Adventures
in My Garden and Rock Garden, by LOUISE BEEBE
WILDER (author of My Garden and Colour in My
Garden) is the descriptive history of a piece of land
hardly more than an acre in size.
The Plain Sailing Cook Book, by SUSANNA
SHANKLIN BROWNE. Simple recipes for beginners.
A Handbook of Cookery for a Small House, by
JESSIE CONRAD. With a preface by her husband,
Joseph Conrad. This was the meat on which our
Cæsar fed and grew so great.
A Pocket Bridge Book, by WALTER CAMP. For
those who must have their daily dummy.
Modern Auction, 1923, by GRACE G. MONTGOMERY.
The new edition of a standard work.
Singles and Doubles, by W. T. TILDEN, 2D.,
world’s tennis champion, 1920, 1921.
The Gist of Golf, by HARRY VARDON. Vardon
writes most readably and gives a chapter to each
club. Pictures.
Field Soccer and Hockey for Women, by HELEN
FROST and HAZEL J. CUBBERLEY. Pictures and
diagrams.
Ski-ing Turns, by VIVIAN CAULFIELD. With card
diagrams that can be removed from the book.
How to Box, by NORMAN CLARK. With 61
photographs.
Training for Power and Leadership, by GRENVILLE KLEISER.
The Making of an Executive, by A. HAMILTON
CHURCH. Personal qualifications and the special
knowledge required.
Creative Selling, by CHARLES HENRY MACKINTOSH.
Making and keeping customers.
The Law of Sales, by JAMES BURTON READ. The
law relating to the transfer of personal property for
considerations.
Advertising for the Retailer, by LLOYD DALLAS
HERROLD. Complete information on every type of
advertising used by the retailer. Illustrations of
layouts, window decorations, show cards, letters, etc.
The Leadership of Advertised Brands, by GEORGE
BURTON HOTCHKISS and RICHARD B. FRANKEN.
Successful advertising and marketing methods.
EDWARD H. SCHULZE’SMaking Letters Pay covers
business letters from the viewpoint of “better
results, in less time, at lower cost”; while CARL A.
NAETHER’SThe Business Letter offers thoroughgoing
practice in making good business letters a
habit. SALLIE B. TANNAHILL’SPs and Qs: A Book
on the Art of Letter Arrangement is concerned with
personal letters.
Funds and Their Uses, by FREDERICK A. CLEVELAND.
Now available in a revised edition.
Methods, instruments and institutions of modern
financial transactions. The revision adds chapters
on the United States Treasury, commercial banks,
the Federal Reserve system, trust companies, investment
bankers and agricultural credit institutions.
Cotton and the Cotton Market, by W. HUSTACE
HUBBARD. Production, marketing, the future contract
system, the speculative factor; a pretty
complete survey.
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, by EDWIN
LEFEVRE. The chief appeal of this book is the
appeal of fiction, although it is obviously founded
on the facts of one or more Wall Street careers.
Much market wisdom.
Co-operative Marketing, by HERMAN STEEN.
Historic Textile Fabrics, by RICHARD GLAZIER.
More than 200 varieties are illustrated.
The Business of Writing, by ROBERT CORTES
HOLLIDAY and ALEXANDER VAN RENSSELAER. A
trustworthy book on marketing the writer’s product.
Writing to Sell, by EDWIN WILDMAN. What
will be marketable and why, from short pieces for
household periodicals to special feature articles for
monthly magazines.
The Community Newspaper, by EMERSON P.
HARRIS and FLORENCE HARRIS HOOKE. Developing
the newspaper to the community’s benefit and the
owners’ profit.
Readers interested in the subject of JAMES HARVEY
ROBINSON’SThe Humanizing of Knowledge
will be interested in ABRAHAM FLEXNER’S new book,
A Modern College and a Modern School.
Modern Industrialism, by FRANK L. MCVEY, presents
in very full outline and from the examples of
many countries present-day industrial organisation.
Trade Unionism in the United States, by ROBERT
F. HOXIE. A revised edition is ready.
Everybody’s Business, by FLOYD PARSONS. A
readable survey of America’s natural resources and
the story of the development of our major
industries.
The Great Game of Politics, by FRANK R. KENT.
Too Much Government—Too Much Taxation,
by CHARLES NORMAN FAY.
Note: The list of every publishing house has
its special characteristics and the reader of books
will naturally associate certain types of books with
certain imprints; it is desirable that he should, aiding
the bookseller, when possible, in the quest for
publications of a special sort. I have tried to name
below, as a general guide supplementing the fragmentary
list above, the chief types of publications
of the four houses associated in the production of
this book:
D. Appleton & Company, whose long history has
given them the honour of publishing important
works by Charles Darwin, Haeckel, Froebel,
Thomas Huxley, John Stuart Mill, Max Nordau,
G. Stanley Hall, Muensterberg, Flammarion, Florence
Nightingale and L. Emmett Holt, publish
many scientific, business, educational, technical and
industrial books, military and naval textbooks;
books on the Spanish language and many translations
into Spanish from English, including fiction;
medical books; fiction by Zona Gale, Joseph C.
Lincoln, Harold Bell Wright, Edith Wharton,
Brand Whitlock, etc., and general literature.
George H. Doran Company publish many books
of historical importance, memoirs, biographies, etc.;
contemporary politics; travel; sport; belles lettres;
a very large list of religious books; spiritualistic
books by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and others;
poetry; plays; and a remarkable fiction list including
Walpole, Mary Roberts Rinehart, W. Somerset
Maugham, Arnold Bennett, etc.
Doubleday, Page & Company are noted as the
publishers of many garden and nature books; of
important biographies and historical works; travel;
poetry; belles lettres; general literature and fiction
by Joseph Conrad, Booth Tarkington, Gene
Stratton-Porter, Edna Ferber, Kathleen Norris, etc.
They publish the works of Rudyard Kipling (except
the Outward Bound Edition: Scribner).
Charles Scribner’s Sons publish works on architecture;
historical and biographical books and
memoirs; letters; belles lettres; books dealing with
problems of race and society; sociological works;
poetry; plays; books on sports; works on art and
decoration, philosophy and religion; many books
illustrated in colour; and fiction. In a long career
the house has had the distinction of publishing the
works of J. M. Barrie, Thomas Carlyle, Edmund
Gosse, W. E. Henley, Maurice Hewlett, James
Huneker, Henrik Ibsen, Henry James, George
Meredith, Theodore Roosevelt, George Santayana,
Robert Louis Stevenson, etc.
All four houses publish books for boys and girls.
Fiction.
In addition to the fiction already discussed attention
may be invited to the following new and recent
books (for new fiction by Galsworthy, Conrad,
V. Sackville West, Arthur Train, Harold Bell
Wright, Ralph Connor, Booth Tarkington, Zona
Gale, Gene Stratton-Porter, Joseph C. Lincoln,
Edith Wharton, Christopher Morley see respective
chapters on these authors; also see Chapters 3, 15,
and 18):
Cross-Sections, by JULIAN STREET. Short stories.
Butterfly, by KATHLEEN NORRIS.
Rufus, by GRACE S. RICHMOND.
Miss Bracegirdle and Others, by STACY AUMONIER. Short stories.
The Motherless, by BENGT BERG, translated by Charles Wharton Stork. The story of a motherless boy and a motherless bear cub.
The Shadowy Third, by ELLEN GLASGOW. Short stories.
The Middle Father, by ANTHONY M. RUD. Norwegian settlers in the Middle West.
Conquistador, by KATHARINE FULLERTON Gerould.
The Orissers, by L. H. MYERS.
Four of a Kind, by J. P. MARQUAND. Four little novels.
The Love Legend, by WOODWARD BOYD.
The Marriage Verdict, by FRANK H. SPEARMAN.
The Really Romantic Age, by L. ALLEN HARKER.
Broken Barriers, by MEREDITH NICHOLSON.
Timber Wolf, by JACKSON GREGORY.
Colin, by E. F. BENSON.
Eris, by ROBERT W. CHAMBERS.
Pandora Lifts the Lid, by CHRISTOPHER MORLEY and DON MARQUIS.
The House of Helen, by CORRA HARRIS.
The Gay Year, by DOROTHY SPEARE.
The Middle of the Road, by SIR PHILIP GIBBS.
La Parcelle 32, by ERNEST PEROCHON.
North of 36, by EMERSON HOUGH.
Fires of Ambition, by GEORGE GIBBS.
Madame Claire, by SUSAN ERTZ.
Corduroy, by RUTH COMFORT MITCHELL.
The Public Square, by WILL LEVINGTON COMFORT.
The Ground Swell, by ALFRED B. STANFORD.
The Song of the Dragon, by JOHN TAINTOR FOOTE. Short stories.
12. Totalling Mr. Tarkington
i
IN the interesting procession of his work, Booth
Tarkington has pretty well paralleled the somewhat
vacillating development of popular literary
taste in his country. This, there is every reason to
believe, has resulted from no conscious intention.
The fashion, in considering Mr. Tarkington, has
usually been to contrast what are called his two
natures—the romanticist who wrote Monsieur
Beaucaire and the realist (more or less) who wrote
The Gentleman From Indiana and The Turmoil.
Very sensibly has it been pointed out that the two
strains are manifest side by side in a number of his
novels, such as The Conquest of Canaan, where the
realism of character is sadly impaled on the rocks
of plot. But, if I may advance the idea with due
diffidence, such as Tarkington always shows in any
discussion of his work, the much more instructive
comparison lies deeper in the man and is the result
of an unrelenting pressure of environment on a personality
endowed with most exceptional talent and
even unmistakable genius. One can say, I think,
although with a great deal of hesitation over its
unavoidable crudeness, that Mr. Tarkington in
some sense repeats what Mr. Van Wyck Brooks
conceives to be the tragedy of Mark Twain, only
in Tarkington’s case it has no air of tragedy. The
common view of the author of Alice Adams is that
he is a lucky fellow who deserves all his luck. Only
in a narrow, godlike perspective would he appear
tragic. And such a conclusion might easily be
premature. When Monsieur Beaucaire appeared
Mr. Frederic Taber Cooper declared it certain that
we knew the extent of the author’s capabilities,
adding that it was unthinkable that he should ever
again essay the realism of The Gentleman From
Indiana. A couple of years ago plenty of persons
qualified to have and to express an opinion asserted
that Tarkington would never overcome his propensity
toward a pulled-together and “happy” ending
in a novel; and in the same year appeared Alice
Adams. As Mr. Tarkington is only fifty-four, and
may easily have a dozen years and a half a dozen
prime novels directly in front of him, to be dogmatic
is to run a perfectly unreasonable risk of stultification.
I shall try to avoid that.
ii
BOOTH TARKINGTON
“An unrelenting pressure of environment on
a personality endowed with most exceptional
talent....”
Newton Booth Tarkington was born in Indianapolis,
29 July 1869, the son of John Stevenson
Tarkington (died 1922, aged ninety) and Elizabeth
(Booth) Tarkington. The father, a Civil War
soldier and a lawyer, was for some years in politics;
the son was a member of the Indiana Legislature
in 1902-3. The mother’s family is not traceably
connected with those Booths celebrated as actors.
In his study of Booth Tarkington which is and will
for a long time remain the chief resource and delight
of those considering the novelist, Robert Cortes
Holliday points out that the Indianapolis of Booth
Tarkington’s youth was a town, and that B. T.
is neither a city nor a country boy, but a town boy.
For a while in his childhood the boy was affected
by nervous disorders resembling St. Vitus attacks.
At about the age of eleven, he became a friend of
James Whitcomb Riley, who was a neighbour. In
his teens, Tarkington had the behaviour of a normal
boy and a spirit of deviltry showed itself that was
to last him until he was thirty. He went to Phillips
Exeter, then to Purdue University, and finally to
Princeton, where he “made” Ivy, than which, in
the way of social success, Princeton offers nothing
more beautiful. Much on the sentimental side is
made to this day of Tarkington’s singing of “Danny
Deever” at class gatherings and reunions. After
leaving Princeton, Tarkington returned to Indianapolis
and pursued the busy social life possible to
a young man of the town while at the same time he
read a good deal and tried various styles of writing.
Mr. Holliday intimates that, like Stevenson, Tarkington
“played the sedulous ape” to a succession of
literary masters, to find out how the thing was done.
The interesting point is that the beginner kept this
activity quite strictly to himself. “It was probably
a consciousness of the foolish look which his unrewarded
activities may have had outside that caused
Mr. Tarkington at that time modestly to describe
the serious schooling which he gave himself as
‘fussin’ with literachoor,’” Holliday tells us. The
fact that the young man earned only $22.50 gross,
or $62.50, or whatever it was, by his first five years
of literary effort has since been as widely published
as Joseph Hergesheimer’s fourteen years without a
single acceptance.
The junior Tarkington was under no necessity of
earning his living and a notebook kept at that time
by his father records the repeated return by publishers
of his first novel, The Gentleman from
Indiana. Monsieur Beaucaire was a long time
getting accepted. The whimsical Cherry was
bought by Henry Mills Alden for Harper’s Magazine,
pigeon-holed as a mistake and then unearthed
and printed when Monsieur Beaucaire had made
Tarkington “valuable.” Forty thousand words of
an early draft of The Gentleman from Indiana had
had to be discarded because, having got his hero out
for a walk, Tarkington could carry neither him nor
the story any further. After an interruption of
some length, The Two Vanrevels was resumed and
wound up only with the greatest difficulty.
Mr. Tarkington was married in 1902 and again
in 1912. He lived for a while in France and
Italy (Capri). His summer home, at Kennebunkport,
Maine, is usually spoken of with some reference
to the study, where models of vessels of every
rig, a valuable collection, are displayed. This is
sometimes spoken of as “the house that Penrod
built” and the ship models are perhaps natural to
a home overlooking a New England harbour. It
is also to be recollected that certain of Mr. Tarkington’s
ancestors hailed from Salem. Perhaps any
other significance in those ships is merely fanciful.
No one who meets Booth Tarkington is insensible
to the personal charm of the man. He is absolutely
without affectation, and the perfect host, the
staunch friend, the sympathetic listener and the
contained and modest talker. Whatever the vicissitudes
he has undergone, whatever the pressures
put upon him, he has weathered them all with a
steady helm. It seems an astonishing, unwarranted
and probably an impudent thing to suggest that
this man has been to a deplorable extent the victim
of circumstances (largely comfortable circumstances);
and that, with a less winning personality—if
some outward expression for the thing must
be sought—the chances are he would have been a
much greater writer than, on his record, he is today.
iii
You see, of course, how handicapped he was from
the start by being “a good fellow.” The extent of
that handicap can only be realised, I think, by
knowing that to this day “nothing, apparently, so
much gives Mr. Tarkington the horrors as the idea
of the ‘literary.’ He does not want to be ‘caught,’
he declares, writing ‘prose.’” I quote Mr. Holliday,
who adds: “Some literary editor in New York
told him that some of the passages in The Turmoil,
in particular (I think) the cemetery scene, were
noble English prose, worthy, I suppose, of the
author of Urn Burial. ‘He liked them,’ says Mr.
Tarkington with a wry face, as though, if he knew
just how, he would cut those passages out.” But
why should Tarkington be horrified by the thought
that he may have written “literature”? What
black curse lies upon “literature”? The only one
I know is the contempt of “good fellows” and other
philistines for an affair they know nothing of and
self-defensively profess to despise. And if Mr.
Tarkington thinks, as perhaps he does, that he spent
painful years of reading and practise writing without
the secret hope that he would some day write a
piece of literature, then, I suspect, he is much mistaken.
But what is it, this mental process? Why
should he be “very quick to insist” that none of his
family have been “offensively” literary? Who is
offended by literature? “Good fellows” have been
known to be very much annoyed by the presence
among them of one whose possession of a taste they
did not share seemed to impugn their own completeness.
There is more than a suspicion that “Tark”
has jekyllhyded others so long as to have concealed
something very precious to him from himself.
There could be no greater contrast, for example,
than between Joseph Hergesheimer and Booth
Tarkington (in this matter). Both are persons of
some taste and genius who follow the profession of
letters. I reveal nothing when I say that Hergesheimer,
of whom personally I am fond, is considered
by many people to be most conceited. Mr.
Hergesheimer would be the first to uphold such a
statement. One of the universally-praised traits
of Mr. Tarkington is his utter lack of self-conceit.
What is the explanation?
Nobody lacks self-conceit, least of all a person
with Tarkington’s endowment. It may not be detectable,
but any psychologist will tell you it exists.
Hergesheimer was just as “conceited” in the days
when no editor would take his stuff as he is today;
only the quality wasn’t visible, there being (practically
speaking) no one to observe it. And the
quality itself was fully engaged and enterprised in
sustaining Joseph Hergesheimer, until such time as
a measurable success, some rounds of applause,
should sustain him. When that hour has struck in
an artist’s life, fortunate the artist if he can turn
the “self-conceit” (which is really self-sustention)
into the direct channel of his work! But to return
to Booth Tarkington: The environment of the
Indianapolis of the 1880s (a pleasant town), was
perhaps not the most favourable for a boy of a specially
nervous constitution and that excessive sensitiveness
so frequently found in company with a fine
imagination. It isn’t to be wondered at that he
was “precocious” until about the age of four, and
“slow” after he began going to school. Phillips
Exeter, like all such places, is devoted to finding the
highest common social factor in the boy. What
Purdue may have been when Tarkington went there,
I have no idea; but it cannot possibly have exceeded
Princeton as a place where self-disguise was imperative
for self-preservation. There are plenty to
remember those Princeton days, when students wore
paint-stained corduroys and drank constructively,
innocently mistaking eccentricities of dress and conduct
for the achievement of personality. The real
Tarkington underneath was forcing itself up at
this time; he was writing for the college magazine
such stuff as college magazines are made on. He
went back to Indianapolis to continue writing; but
the long era of good fellowship had done its work,
a certain “self-conceit” and with it a decent open
dignity had been put under battened hatches, and
the young man was preparing to pay the fairly
serious penalty—the penalty of an inability to take
himself seriously enough, the penalty of wasted
time, vitiated effort, delayed arrival, deferred
achievement.
iv
Little wonder, then, that Mr. Tarkington told
Mr. Holliday in 1917 that he was writing a book
(The Magnificent Ambersons) that he didn’t think
anybody would read; and a year or so later he was
talking in the same strain about Alice Adams. The
last remaining vestiges of an attitude which has
crippled him are perceptible in such utterances. He
was ready, in 1917, to admit that he couldn’t read
Stevenson any longer, to confess that the stories
of American politics called In the Arena were about
all of his early work he “could stand to re-read.”
Popularity and unpopularity, he thought, had always
been an accident with him; his idea seemed
to be that “anybody can write a popular story”—of
course, anybody can’t—and, as for himself, he had
never “played the goat to entertain anybody.”
And devices in his books that might have the air
of being bids for popular favour were there simply
because, when he wrote, he didn’t know any better.
As for putting them in to please an editor or reader:
“Really, I’d as soon have forged a check.”
Holliday quotes him further: “I’ve written
things only as I thought they ought to be written.
I thought in my youth that life could be got into
books with prettier colours and more shaping than
the models actually had; and I fell in with a softer,
more commonplace and more popular notion of
what a story should be. Where that acceptance
definitely stopped in me (though the book may not
show it) was Beauty and the Jacobin. It was at
that time that I was painting with my old ornamental
picture framer. Until then, I thought they
were the ‘cheese,’—not for sales, but the right
‘cheese.’”
Perfectly honest! If there is anything else, and
I think there is, it is hidden from Mr. Tarkington
himself, or was. We may look upon the melodrama
and sentimentalism of The Gentleman from Indiana,
or The Conquest of Canaan and feel less distaste
for them than does Tarkington who, at their
mention, looks pitifully unhappy. He is suffering
the acute reaction of the years after, whereas it is
possible for us to note the simple fact that what
now seems conventional and cheap in those novels
was much less conventional, and not nearly so cheap,
in 1899 and 1905. The fact remains—doesn’t
it?—of Tarkington having written an essentially
realistic novel, his first, when we were all wild about
Richard Carvel and Prisoners of Hope and When
Knighthood Was in Flower—that sort of thing.
Although, to be sure, there was The Honorable
Peter Sterling, there had been the earlier novels of
William Dean Howells, and Theodore Dreiser was
putting on paper Sister Carrie. Another fact that
remains is the co-existence (1905) of In the Arena
and The Conquest of Canaan and the fixed, large
achievement, in 1912-13, of the novel called The
Flirt.
It is easy to agree with Mr. Holliday that the
efforts at invention in the story surrounding Cora
Madison are “childlike,” but I am convinced that
The Flirt is a novel for which a place must be reserved
in any list of twenty distinguished American
novels. The portrayals of Cora and her brother,
the boy Hedrick, seem to me to settle that. Thackeray’s
picture of Becky Sharp is, I feel, no more
biting than Tarkington’s delineation of Cora;
Hedrick has as much gusto as any character of
Dickens; and in both cases Mr. Tarkington has
accomplished the thing with less than half the
effort Thackeray and Dickens brought to bear. Of
Tarkington, as they would say in golf, it is all in
the wrist. The same undemonstrative precision,
skill and force which went into the porcelain perfection
of Monsieur Beaucaire, which fumbled so
badly in such a mixture (“the rough”) as The Two
Vanrevels, is felt on every page of The Flirt where
Cora or Hedrick are “in play.” Unfortunately, the
inspired suggestion of the present Mrs. Tarkington
which was responsible for the existence of Hedrick
Madison is also responsible indirectly for the boy
Penrod. Those Penrod stories which, Tarkington
admits, cost no effort to write! Toward this variety
of work several attitudes are possible. The strictest
condemns it, and because of it rates down the author.
Obviously, such a view is just only where the author
has held his writing throughout as a sacred vocation.
The severe, exalted standard of judgment cannot
very well be applied to anyone like Arnold Bennett
or Booth Tarkington, both of whom, for quite different
reasons, have a lively sense of what I would
call the amenities of living. A more tolerant attitude
holds the author justified for one or several
excuses—he may have his living to make, he may
have the thing in him and need to get it out of his
system, the demand for Penrodism may carry its
vox-populi-vox-Dei conviction, there may be nothing
else to write.... Between the smashing drive
and the perfect strokes on the putting green, one
is not allowed to intermit the bad brassy or the futile
iron shot; one is required to play.
The Flirt appeared in 1913, Penrod in 1914, The
Turmoil in 1915, Penrod and Sam in 1916, Seventeen,
an outgrowth of Penrod, in 1916 also; The
Magnificent Ambersons in 1918, and Ramsey Milholland,
the last wring-out of Tarkington’s Bad
Boy in 1919. Even those who declare the creation
of Penrod and William Sylvanus Baxter, Jr. (in
Seventeen) to be “great work”—and they are
numerous and their opinion is respectable—will
perhaps feel, as they contemplate the prolonged
attack of Penroditis, that this adolescent in literature
gave his fashioner a distinct setback. They
may look with admiration at a photograph of the
study in The House That Penrod Built and witness
all those ships, and the thought may occur to them
that these beautiful toys took too long the place of
ampler vessels, which, with rich cargoes, with the
help of the stars and in spite of weather, might
have been worked home.
v
One such fine vessel, richly-freighted, made port
at last, in 1921, the Alice Adams. To praise this
novel, the first in which Mr. Tarkington made an
entirely successful passage, is easy; to discriminate
in regard to it is difficult, for the simple reason that
Mr. Tarkington’s past work has made such a performance
incomparable. Here was a man who in
his greatest feats had always shown corresponding
blemishes. The Flirt had been spotted with melodrama
(as if the drama of Cora and the mordancy
of Hedrick did not serve to tarnish any artificial
sheen). The Turmoil, more skilfully constructed
than The Flirt, suffered an entire loss of the detachment
which Tarkington preserved toward Cora
Madison; and instead of a pitiless portrayal we had
a modern morality play. The Magnificent Ambersons
was afflicted with a pulled-around ending.
But in Alice Adams all of these defects were met
and adjusted; the movement was natural and not
“plotted”; no moral underlay the exposed incidents;
Mr. Tarkington was impartial without being in the
least unsympathetic. Then why discriminate?
Surely, Alice Adams has everything! Not at all.
No author’s one book ever has, I suppose; and in
finally achieving the symmetry and truth and grace
of Alice Adams there was the sacrifice of a nervous
force which animated, in a varying extent, all three
of the earlier novels. One must learn, in criticism,
to value above all else what can only be called
“vitality,” whether in painting, or sculpture, music
or literature. This mysterious but indispensable
flame burns with a different intensity in individual
writers. In Mr. Galsworthy, for example, it is low
in novels, somewhat higher, at times, in plays; but
relatively low throughout his work. In Mr. Tarkington,
I cannot help feeling, it is higher in The
Flirt than in anything else he has written; for savage
and powerful as are the stories of In the Arena,
the material is something that the author touches
with his foot, rather than shapes with his hands.
Indeed, this instinctive repugnance in Mr. Tarkington,
as inveterate in him as in so many American
writers, is one of the strictest limitations on his
art. In older cultures than ours in America, where
it is well understood that admission to the human
race cannot be denied by some to others, a Balzac
or a Conrad or even a Dickens can write with the
same manifest vitality of almost anybody, however
inhumanly horrible—as, for example, the “incorruptible”
Professor and mad anarchist in Conrad’s
tale of The Secret Agent. In the case of Tarkington,
Mr. Holliday has cleverly observed the type
of material in which our writer’s vitality is most
evident—the memorable procession of drunkards
in his stories, the unmatched darkeys of the stable
alleys, the large number of Tarkington characters
vocal with song.
As to plays: the man doesn’t regard them as his
“real trade.” All the earlier ones were written in
collaboration, usually with Harry Leon Wilson;
and Tarkington, with an engaging candour, admits
at once that the great cost of a theatrical production
must be met, if possible, by filling the house.
Writing alone, he has given the stage such utter
ineptitude as Poldekin and such delicious comedy as
Clarence. He now writes a play, usually, because
a particular producer wants one with a particular
actor in mind. In his book-length fiction he is unrestricted,
unless the engagement in advance of the
next couple of novels for serial publication may
have its oblique effect. After all, it must be very
difficult, knowing that your next two books are
first to be placed before a certain large constituency
of women readers, not to select your material “according”
and not to mould it imperceptibly somewhat
nearer the—supposed, suspected, or ascertained—hearts’
desire of all those ladies.
vi
Booth Tarkington’s home in Indianapolis, at
1100 North Pennsylvania Street, is a plain brick
house, far from new. Business creeps into the
street, but there is some “lawn” still about the house,
a hedge, Virginia creeper on the brick walls. Six
winter months are spent here, the other six in the
house at Kennebunkport, which, being newer, is furnished
with more simplicity and taste. Tarkington’s
workshop is upstairs—a tilted drawing board
beside an east window, a flexible electric lamp,
plenty of large-size sheets of yellow paper, two
dozen pencils kept sharp by two pencil-sharpening
machines. Tarkington has never used a typewriter
and dictates only letters and not all of those. His
sister-in-law, Miss Louise Keifer, copies his pencilled
yellow pages of manuscript on the typewriter.
Spectacles of all sizes and weights lie on a table.
The man breakfasts between nine and ten, works
until 1.30, and then pauses to eat a slender lunch
brought to his study on a tray. He continues working
until 3.30, and sometimes writes in the evenings,
although the habit of writing pretty regularly at
night has been abandoned. Even so it is a longer
working day than most writers can keep. Mrs.
Tarkington intercepts all interruptions; no telephone
call can break in, nor any thought-distracting
piece of news. On evenings when there is no engagement
and Tarkington is not writing, he will
play double-deck solitaire for an hour, read until
about one o’clock, then go to bed. In Maine the
day’s programme is a half-hour earlier throughout;
work stops around noon; a short motor ride and a
quick dip in the ocean follow; and the afternoon is
most likely to be spent in a motorboat. The Maine
evening frequently includes a walk of a mile to
and from the movies; this is mainly for the sake of
the walk, although the worse the picture is, the
more restful Tarkington is likely to find it.
Notes, sometimes covering several dozen pencilled
pages and undecipherable by anyone else,
precede the composition of a play or novel. They
are vague ideas and suggestions, the writer endeavouring
not to crystallise his story too suddenly.
When this occurs, it is sometimes necessary to write
the next to the last chapter or scene and then go
back to the general plan or the beginning. Work
proceeds every day, Sundays included, and averages
about 1,400 words a day of fresh output, preceded
by correction of the previous day’s writing. In addition
to this day by day revision, Tarkington revises
a story or book as a whole; it is then typed,
and after that is seldom altered.
“He has never resorted to neurotic realism or
the much over-exploited nastiness of high life to
give zest to his fiction,” says a recent utterance in
praise of Mr. Tarkington. And the author is quoted
as himself saying: “The problems of youth had
been interesting me for some time, more than I realised”—when
he turned to Penrod—“except the one
problem that most people who call themselves realists
feel that they must deal with—that is, in an
untrammelled fashion—the problem of sex, which
I have never felt was a subject for exploitation.”
“Neurotic realism” is a phrase of wabbly connotation,
but if a study of neurotic characters and
tendencies be meant, there are plenty of those in
Tarkington fiction. Most of the Tarkington drunkards
are neurotic, Cora Madison is a victim of the
narcism complex, and, as Mr. Holliday has pointed
out, “The Turmoil is remarkable as a book of nervous
diseases.” One of the most unlifelike things
about Penrod (still more, William Sylvanus Baxter,
Jr., he of Seventeen) is the absolute erasure of
that contact with “the facts of life” which constitutes
one of the indubitable facts of boyhood. And
though as many crimes have been committed in the
name of realism as in the name of liberty, the painfully
sincere purpose of some of our most “untrammelled”
writers in their treatment of sex cannot
justly be called “exploitation.” One thinks of Sherwood
Anderson. The analysis of Holliday, in a
final quest for the secret of Tarkington’s popularity
as an author (not invariable, but abundant), is perhaps
as good as we shall get:
“He is very much like most people. There is
nothing, except its energy, peculiar about his mind;
it has no strong idiosyncratic bias, no strange, abnormal
quality. At first, as in Cherry, he may have
been excessively belletristic. That was not only not
odd, but quite natural in a well-educated, young
writer. But, just for the joke of the thing, think
for an instant of Mr. Tarkington in connection with
such a writer as, let us say, George Moore. In this
wearer of the literary ermine you find laid bare a
soul compacted of nearly everything that is detestable
to the mind of a plain citizen going about his
business in the marketplace. He has confessed consuming
egotism, quivering sensibility, fastidiousness,
vanity, timidity coupled with calculating shamelessness,
sensuality, a streak of feline cruelty, and
absolute spiritual incontinence. Or try to think of
Mr. Tarkington coming along with some such perverse
thinking (however shrewd) as Samuel Butler’s:
‘the worst misfortune that can happen to any
person is to lose his money; the second is to lose his
health; and the loss of reputation is a bad third.’
Mr. Tarkington admires all those things which
every decent, ordinary, simple-hearted person admires:
dash, courage, honesty, honour, feminine virtue
and graciousness and beauty, and so on. He
hates precisely those things hated by all honest,
healthy ‘American’ people: sham, egoism, conceit,
cruelty, affectation, and so forth. In short, though
he is a red hot artist (and most Americans ‘don’t
care a nickel for art’), he believes in all those things
which make up the creed of the average sane, wholesome
person in this country. He has infectious
humour, and (though savage in attack upon what
he feels to be vicious) abounding ‘good humour.’
Added to all this, he has a most winning and rich,
though not at all complex, personality. He is in
his own person, indeed, what most of us would like
to be. In a word, doubtless his books are popular
because of the same qualities that made their author
popular as an undergraduate.”
There are compensations of all kinds on this
earth, and one of Mr. Tarkington’s—the most enviable
of all, I think—must be knowledge of a certain
occasion in which he was of the utmost possible
service to another American writer. The course he
took at that time, the energy he displayed, would
have been very improbable in one whose natural
vanity of himself as an artist was in the least like
George Moore’s. If it was for too long a literary
misfortune that Mr. Tarkington’s “self-conceit” lay
in the direction of being a good fellow, at least he
made of good fellowship, in this instance, the
minted gold of personal greatness. No! Now it
cannot be told; but there will be those alive to
tell it.
Books by Booth Tarkington
1899 The Gentleman from Indiana
1900 Monsieur Beaucaire
1902 The Two Vanrevels
1903 Cherry earlier, in composition, than The Gentleman from Indiana
1905 In the Arena
1905 The Conquest of Canaan
1905 The Beautiful Lady
1907 His Own People
1908 The Guest of Quesnay
1909 Beasley’s Christmas Party
1911 Beauty and the Jacobin
1913 The Flirt
1914 Penrod
1915 The Turmoil
1916 Penrod and Sam
1916 Seventeen
1918 The Magnificent Ambersons
1919 Ramsey Milholland
1921 Alice Adams
1922 Gentle Julia
1923 The Fascinating Stranger and Other Stories
Plays by Booth Tarkington
1901 Monsieur Beaucaire with E. G. SUTHERLAND
With HARRY LEON WILSON: The Man from Home Cameo Kirby Your Humble Servant Springtime Getting a Polish Mister Antonio
1917 The Country Cousin with JULIAN STREET
With HARRY LEON WILSON: The Gibson Upright Up from Nowhere
1919 Clarence
1920 Poldekin
1921 The Wren
1921 The Intimate Strangers
Sources on Booth Tarkington
Booth Tarkington, by Robert Cortes Holliday.
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY. Authoritative,
honest, delightful; especially sound in its detailed
criticism of the books up to and including The
Turmoil and Seventeen. When Holliday’s book
was written, Tarkington was at work on The
Magnificent Ambersons, for an estimate of which
see Holliday’s Broome Street Straws.
Contemporary American Novelists, 1900-1920, by
Carl Van Doren. THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Booth Tarkington at Home, by John R. McMahon,
LADIES’ HOME JOURNAL, November, 1922
(page 15).
Private Information.
Articles, reviews, etc., are plentiful and the reader
is advised to consult the READERS’ GUIDE TO PERIODICAL
LITERATURE for the years since 1914.
13. A Parody Outline of Stewart
i
ABOUT two years ago, when Donald Ogden
Stewart had just abandoned the bond business
for the pursuit of a literary career, he was asked to
write a brief account of his life, with the following
result:
“Donald Ogden Stewart was born in Columbus,
Ohio, on November 30, 1894. In his early
years he gave manifold evidences of his gift
for humour, and many of his bright childhood
remarks are still related by his proud mother upon
the slightest provocation, or in fact, upon no provocation
at all. There were others, however—principally
among the guests at the hotel where Donald
lived—who did not think that this child prodigy
was so funny. Mr. Stewart bears a long red
scar on his head—such as might be made by a brick
or other missile—as mute evidence of one little red-headed
girl’s particular lack of appreciation of his
early humorous efforts.
“At the age of 14 he was sent to the Phillips
Exeter Academy because it was a good preparatory
school for Harvard. In the fall of 1912, Mr.
Stewart entered Yale. While at New Haven, Mr.
Stewart went out for all the athletic teams possible,
and was always among those of whom it was said
in the college paper at the end of the season, ‘And
we also wish to thank those members of the third
and fourth teams who have worked so faithfully
without reward—and yet we cannot say without
reward—for they are rewarded with the knowledge
that they have worked for old Yale,’ etc.
“Mr. Stewart was graduated in 1916 and selected
a certain large public service corporation as the
scene of his future success. It was his desire to
start at the bottom and work up; the first half of
this wish was readily granted him. After a brief,
inspiring visit with the head of the corporation, Mr.
Stewart was sent to the Birmingham, Alabama, office
which was about as far away as the head of the corporation
could possibly send Mr. Stewart. While
in Birmingham, Mr. Stewart took a keen interest in
his job and read the complete works of Anatole
France, George Moore, Fyodor Dostoievski, Henrik
Ibsen, Gustav Flaubert and many others. He also
intended to read the Alexander Hamilton business
course, but did not quite get around to it before
he was sent to the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, office.
Photo by Nickolas Muray
DONALD OGDEN STEWART
“In Pittsburgh, Mr. Stewart took a keen interest
in his job and read the works of Leo Tolstoy,
Friedrich Nietzsche, G. B. Shaw, Thomas Hardy,
Joseph Conrad and others. He also started to take
piano lessons and got as far as ‘The Happy
Farmers.’ He was just on the point of reading the
Alexander Hamilton business course when he was
sent to Chicago. After ten months in Chicago, Mr.
Stewart joined the Navy. Having never been on
a ship or the ocean in his life, he was at once
appointed an instructor in Practical Navigation,
Seamanship, Naval Ordnance, and Signals. This
experience was invaluable and Mr. Stewart came
out of the Great War a deepened man.
“His old position with the great corporation
awaited him and Mr. Stewart went back to the work
of the world in the spring of 1918. He was sent
to the Minneapolis office, where he took a keen interest
in his job and read the works of H. G.
Wells, Havelock Ellis, and H. L. Mencken; met
F. Scott Fitzgerald, and led two cotillions. He was
also preparing to take up the Alexander Hamilton
business course when he accepted an offer of employment
in Dayton, Ohio, with a financial organisation.
“Mr. Stewart spent a delightful year in Dayton
where he learned to play golf, and read the works
of Max Beerbohm, Sainte-Beuve, Casanova, Swift,
James Branch Cabell, James Huneker, and William
Congreve. He also renewed his piano lessons, getting
as far as the Bach three-part inventions and
‘Easy Classics.’ On December 30, 1920, he read
the first volume of the Alexander Hamilton business
course, after which he decided that he wanted to
go in for literature. In January, 1921, Mr. Stewart
came to New York City to find a job (literary if
possible), but there were so many symphony concerts
that month that he didn’t get a chance to look
around until the middle of February.
“The idea for the Parody Outline of History
came to Mr. Stewart in March, while hearing Mr.
Mengelberg conduct the National Orchestra in the
Pathetique Symphony.
“Mr. Stewart is unmarried and very near-sighted.
He is fond of Beethoven, Scotch, and Max
Beerbohm.”
ii
So much for Mr. Stewart’s life up to the publication
of The Parody Outline of History. In the
following year (1922)—but let Mr. Stewart again
speak:
“After the appearance of the Parody Outline Mr.
Stewart, having heard a great deal about Europe
in the course of his naval war service in Chicago,
decided to go abroad. Many of his friends recommended
Paris as a pleasant city in which to work,
so Mr. Stewart went to Paris, which he found indeed
very pleasant but not for work. So after a
brief period of recuperation he journeyed to Vienna
where he grew a splendid red beard and wrote Perfect
Behavior.
“Finding, however, that the beard was exhausting
too much of his creative energy, Mr. Stewart shaved
and went to Budapest, where he enjoyed himself
immensely at the rate of 700 Hungarian crowns
to the dollar.
“But in the middle of October he began to feel
strangely uneasy, and as his condition grew steadily
worse he consulted an authority and learned, to his
surprise and delight, that he was going to have
another book.
“Bidding a hasty farewell to the gay life of Budapest,
which now seemed all too empty and frivolous,
Mr. Stewart journeyed with his precious secret to
Capri, there, under the ever-blue Italian skies, to
await the happy event. He prayed with all his
heart that it might be a novel, for he had never had
a novel, although he had wanted one all his life.
But early in February, 1923, Mr. Stewart discovered
that the ‘little stranger’ was to be another satire,
and although it was a bit of a blow at first, after a
few days he got over his disappointment at not having
a novel; and when, in June, Mr. Stewart returned
to America he took with him, proudly, his
little third book, which he had christened Aunt
Polly’s Story of Mankind.”
iii
Alexander Woollcott speaking in “Shouts and
Murmurs” in the New York Herald of March
18, 1923:
“Stewart is a preposterously tall, blonde man,
with an enviably large amount of his twenties still
to squander. His profile is faintly reminiscent of
that most delightful and fantastic of all creatures,
Winsor McKay’s Gertie. He knows more about the
music than he does about the books of the world,
and has, we suspect, gone in for reading so recently
that he probably thinks all novels are like Joyce’s
Ulysses. We ran across him here and there in
France last summer, starting out on one pilgrimage
together from the Café Valterre, in the Place Stanislas
at Nancy, that celebrated restaurant which set
forth marvellous dishes even when the bombs were
dropping on Nancy every evening and there was
not another good meal to be found anywhere else
in Lorraine. Up the street somewhere was M.
Coué, healing away for dear life, and on the outskirts
of the town an imitation Oberammergau was
in full swing. But the two of us were minded rather
to move on to the battlefields, and for the purpose
engaged a morsel of a French car, driven by a
youngster who spoke a horrible dialect he had
picked up three years before from the Americans
stationed at Neufchateau. The memories of that
rambling excursion into a cheerless countryside,
still littered with the rusted snarls of barbed wire
and still gashed with the trenches no one has had
time or strength to obliterate, are brought flooding
back by the inscription in the copy of Perfect
Behavior lying open here on the desk. It is inscribed:
‘In memory of terrible days and ghastly
nights on the battlefields of France,’ and winds up
with this disconcerting proclamation: ‘“It shall
never happen again.”—Stewart.’
“Marc Connelly was agitated the other day by
the receipt of a cablegram from Stewart in Capri
which read thus:
“‘The Queen of Sweden is here. What shall I
do?—Stewart.’
“Connelly’s cabled reply must be admired
equally for its sagacity and its thrift. It was:
‘Compromise.’”
Books by Donald Ogden Stewart
1921 A Parody Outline of History
1922 Perfect Behavior
1923 Aunt Polly’s Story of Mankind
Sources on Donald Ogden Stewart
The Making of a Humorist, by DONALD OGDEN
STEWART, suppressed by the author, 1921.
My Naval Career, by DONALD OGDEN STEWART
(Privately unpublished, 1921).
14. Miss Zona Gale
i
NO one any longer doubts that Zona Gale belongs
in the very small company of American
women novelists whose work is of the first artistic
importance. Her history is interesting. Of old
New England parentage, she was born in Portage,
Wisconsin, where she now lives. She wrote, at
thirteen, a novel “which almost simultaneously
came back to me from a publisher.” At sixteen,
just after she had entered the University of Wisconsin,
she submitted a 3,000-word short story to
the Milwaukee Evening Wisconsin, which paid
her $3. When she finished college she went to work
for that newspaper. “I secured a position by attrition.
I presented myself every morning at the desk
of the city editor. At the end of two weeks the city
editor let me write about a flower show. I have
never put such emotion into anything else I have
written.” She was another month getting on the
staff. Later, by offering a list of suggestions based
on the day’s news, she succeeded after many weeks
in getting on the staff of the New York World.
An anonymous writer in The Bookman has pictured
Miss Gale in New York: “When she was a
reporter on the World, and as beautiful as any girl
could be, she was put on difficult assignments that
might well have terrified one as fragile and flower-like
and feminine as she; but she never winced....
She covered murders and robberies—anything
given her to do she did, at any hour of the day or
night. But all the while she was writing exquisite
poetry; and every day of her life she sent a letter to
her mother, who was back in Wisconsin. If she
was waiting for an interview with some financier of
the hour, she did not dawdle her time away in the
corridor of his hotel. Instead, she pulled out a pad
and pencil and wrote as many pages as she could
on a short story; or she dashed off a lyric; or she
made copious notes for future work. I think she
was about the most ambitious girl in New York at
that time—too ambitious, some said; her praises
were being sung—too much sung was a common
rumour; her picture—how lovely she was, and is!—was
published repeatedly—too repeatedly, dear
enemies whispered; and everyone was waiting to
see just how long it would take her to make good.”
ii
It took some time. Not until the year in which
she was 29 did she land anywhere “to speak of,”
though for ten years previous to that acceptance, by
Success Magazine, she had constantly submitted
stories. That was in 1903. Then, in 1911, the
Delineator held a short story contest in which over
15,000 stories were received. Miss Gale took first
prize with a tale called “The American Dawn.”
It was $2,000 and in addition her other two entries
(each person was allowed to submit three stories)
were deemed good enough to be purchased. But
meanwhile she had written stories about Pelleas and
Ettare, two old lovers, and stories about Friendship
Village—some forty of the first and, ultimately,
about sixty of the second—and the process of collecting
her Friendship Village fiction into books
had begun. Said Miss Gale, in 1919: “The first
editor to whom these Friendship Village stories were
submitted declined them with the word that his
acquaintance with small towns was wide but that
he had never seen any such people as these....
I am still not sure that he was not right.”
She was the author of ten published books before
she produced anything constituting a lien upon general
attention. But then, with an effect of extreme
suddenness to the world outside of Portage, there
came from her pen the 402-page novel, Birth. Its
length is a point of interest in view of the brevity
of Miss Lulu Bett and Faint Perfume, both of
which are so decidedly under the average novel in
length. And yet Birth exhibits the same conciseness
of phrase, the same avoidance of unnecessary
words so noticeable in the two later books. It is
the story of a poor little man, Marshall Pitt, who
comes to an insignificant Western town as a pickle
salesman and remains there as a paperhanger, a husband
and a father. The book’s comments on life
have been aptly described as “piercing”—it is a fine
needlework of satire—but there are lovely lyrical
moments and the tragic action is touched with
majesty. Altogether a great novel. Miss Gale considers
it the finest thing she has done and for once
her judgment of her own work, generally as untrustworthy
as most authors’ or slightly more so,
is right.
Then came Miss Lulu Bett, read with the enthusiasm
of discovery by the publisher, who telegraphed
his congratulations—a thing publishers infrequently
do! Except in England, where its merit
was quickly noted, Birth had not sold at all well.
Six magazine editors had rejected Miss Lulu Bett
as a serial. Happily, all signs failed. The crisply-told
little novel of the household drudge and her
fortunes went into one edition after another; a play
from the novel was sought and Miss Gale fashioned
it herself; the annual Pulitzer prize was awarded to
the play. Whether the concision of style practised
so effectively in Birth was not carried a bit too far
in Miss Lulu Bett must always remain a matter of
opinion. The most interesting point, I think, is the
change of ending which the requirements of the
theatre forced upon Miss Gale. As she observed, an
audience in a playhouse could not reasonably be expected
to swallow the spectacle of a woman marrying
two men in the space of three hours, even though
the indicated lapse of time was much longer than
that; she therefore, to make the play, caused Miss
Bett’s first marriage to turn out to be valid after all.
In this matter Miss Gale was not guilty of “sweetening”
her story, as has been charged. She simply
was up against a limitation as definite as that which
restricts the number of scenes possible in a play.
iii
And this year she has given us Faint Perfume,
a study of a finely sensitive feminine personality
stifling in the atmosphere of a quite usual sort of
American family. Leda Perrin, forced to make her
home with the Crumbs, is brought into a fleeting
contact with Barnaby Powers, a writer with a temperament
of the same response. They meet, together
face the defeat of their desire, and go separately
apart. At the close there is the briefest possible
second meeting and a hope is held out for their
eventual happiness together. This theme, of the
utmost delicacy, is the occasion for a considerable
display of virtuosity by Miss Gale. By means of
deft and distinct individualisation of her characters—each
Crumb, for instance, standing out as a complete
fiery particle—she orchestrates the melodic
fragment of Leda and Barnaby in a sort of free
treatment (but with careful working out), as a
composer might do in setting a quartette for strings.
May this musical simile be helpful! The clipped
style of Miss Lulu Bett is here carried a step further,
until Miss Gale almost seems to out-Sinclair Miss
May Sinclair. The style has been called precious,
which is the technical word for what the ordinary
person calls “affected”; and, on the other hand, one
able critic has declared that it is not the style that
is precious but Miss Gale’s material. One thing is
certain, the treatment is as far removed as possible
from the literalness of such a novel as Main Street,
and this is natural to expect when we remember that
Miss Gale is, after all and perhaps fundamentally,
a poet. Her poems published in book form are to
a great extent inferior to her best poems, which,
so far as I know, still repose in some old files of
the Smart Set magazine.
The point, however, is not the merit or demerit
of Faint Perfume, nor the relative values of Miss
Gale’s three books here discussed. The point is
Zona Gale, her undeniable artistry, her literary
maturity and her manifest power ... and the importance
of her work to come.
Books by Zona Gale
1906 Romance Island
1907 The Loves of Pelleas and Ettarre
1908 Friendship Village
1909 Friendship Village Love Stories
1911 Mothers to Men
1912 Christmas
1913 When I Was a Little Girl
1914 Neighborhood Stories
1915 Heart’s Kindred
1917 A Daughter of Tomorrow
1918 Birth
1919 Peace in Friendship Village
1920 Miss Lulu Bett
1920 Neighbors (play)
1921 Miss Lulu Bett (play)
1923 Faint Perfume
Sources on Zona Gale
The Women Who Make Our Novels (second or
third edition, 1919 or 1922). MOFFAT YARD &
COMPANY.
The Literary Spotlight, XVIII: Zona Gale, in THE
BOOKMAN for April, 1923. This article now
forms a chapter in the book, The Literary Spotlight,
with an introduction by John Farrar.
Zona Gale, An Artist in Fiction, by WILSON FOLLETT.
Booklet published by D. Appleton &
Company.
15. For the Literary Investor
i
AS in the world of finance there are varieties of
investment, so in reading. A delicate parallel
would be between individual authors and, let us
say, the mortgage field; whereas the reader who
chooses books included in undertakings like the
Lambskin Library, the Murray Hill Library or the
Modern Student’s Library is like the man adventuring
among well-seasoned bonds. The individual
author is the bolder risk, less easily to be abandoned,
lacking (usually) the element of diversification;
the certainty of interest from those carefully selected
Library volumes is somewhat greater and the investment
in them is more readily marketable in the discovery
that your commitment is shared with the
other fellow, who also knows and has read them.
Then there is among books that type of investment
for which men constantly seek when trying to place
their money—the unlisted and almost unheard-of,
lonely, isolated enterprise which one may, and probably
will, have all to himself....
What follows is a series of what, in the money
world, would be called “offerings.” These literary
offerings are not necessarily in the least related to
each other, although here and there you may find
features in common. Each stands on the foundation
of its own “attractiveness” to you as an individual;
but there is none which has not given a good return
to some group of readers, large or less large. Some
are well-seasoned; others, although new, show their
intrinsic worth for such time and attention as you
may commit to them.
ii
J. C. Snaith, novelist. John Collis Snaith, born
in 1876, in Nottinghamshire of Yorkshire stock.
Athletic in his youth, before his health became impaired,
playing cricket, football and hockey on
county teams. Always in the middle of a novel,
either at Skegness or in London, where he may with
difficulty be tracked down at the Garrick Club,
hidden among W. J. Locke, W. B. Maxwell,
A. E. W. Mason, Hugh Walpole, Arnold Bennett,
E. Temple Thurston, etc. His novels exhibit constant
variety. Richard Mansfield was always hoping
for a play from Snaith’s Broke of Covenden so
that he might act as Broke. The Sailor, supposed
to have been suggested by John Masefield’s career,
was a great popular success (1916) and is read and
remembered widely today. The Coming, an exquisite
and powerful story in which the reappearance
of Jesus Christ in present-day England is suggested,
made an extraordinary impression. On the
whole it is perhaps Snaith’s own favourite. The
Undefeated, a story of England in wartime, had
a large sale and gives promise of more permanence
than any similar book, including H. G. Wells’s
Mr. Britling. A recent novel, The Van Roon, is a
lighter story written around the theft of a famous
painting. Snaith’s Araminta, which is being freshly
brought out this year, is a whimsical romance of a
country girl who comes to London and is sued for
by two noblemen. Snaith says: “Each novel I
write is in the nature of an experiment. To me a
good novel is a mental tonic, exhilarating, educative,
humanising.” He is both versatile and in the quality
of his work of unusual excellence.
W. B. Maxwell, novelist. English. A writer
who has reached undeniable greatness at times and
who, when possessing the finest material, need ask
no odds of any living novelist. His most recent
story, The Day’s Journey, is a beautifully-conceived
and beautifully-written story of the friendship between
two men enduring throughout their lives.
The differences in character, the obstacles arising
in the course of that friendship, the antagonisms and
fallings-apart and the renewals of these two old
comrades are put on paper with a fidelity of observation,
a tenderness and an avoidance of sentimentality
that would be difficult to overpraise.
Maxwell’s novels are of great variety; attention is
particularly called to In Cotton Wool, the story of
a weakling. Mrs. Thompson, The Devil’s Garden
and Spinster of This Parish are also highwater
marks in his writing.
Hugh Walpole. Perhaps no living novelist has
shown so uniform a quality or so progressive an
excellence. He resembles a stock which, starting
at a modest price and unfailingly paying dividends,
has gone steadily upward to par and is now quoted
at a premium. His great success, The Cathedral,
is now followed by Jeremy and Hamlet, which,
although not a “sequel,” is a companion volume to
Jeremy (most popular of all Walpole’s stories before
the appearance of The Cathedral). As Jeremy
dealt with the history of a little boy—most singularly
resembling the Hugh of Mr. Walpole’s own
boyhood—so Jeremy and Hamlet presents the adventures
of that boy accompanied by the only proper
companion for a small boy, a dog.
Rudyard Kipling. For a discussion of Kipling’s
new work, The Irish Guards in the Great War, see
Chapter 8. The best exposition of Kipling, the
poet, will be found in Andre Chevrillon’s Three
Studies in English Literature: Kipling, Galsworthy,
Shakespeare (translated by Florence Simmonds).
Katharine Fullerton Gerould, in her Modes and
Morals, in the essay on “The Remarkable Rightness
of Rudyard Kipling,” offers a brilliant justification
for Kipling as a prophetic and moral influence in
English affairs. The literary investor should not
let these aspects take his attention from the Kipling
of Plain Tales from the Hills, of Kim and of such
short stories as “The Brushwood Boy” and “They.”
A collection of rich, remarkably diversified, “gilt-edged”
securities possessing the widest possible
market and an almost universal currency.
Selma Lagerlöf, Swedish novelist, the only
woman so far to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature.
The quality of her work is best conveyed by
the words of various critics. Edwin Björkman:
“She has revived not only the courage but the ability
to feel and dream and aspire that belonged to the
scorned romanticists of the early nineteenth century.
But this ... she has achieved for us without
surrender of that intimate connection between
poetry and real life which was established by the
naturalists in the latter half of the same century.”
J. B. Kerfoot, in Life: “The wise cannot find bottom
nor the child get beyond its depth.” Attempted
comparisons with George Eliot fail because Selma
Lagerlöf has the fine Swedish folklore to enrich
the roots of her work. “She is as national,” says
Walter Prichard Eaton, “as a song by Grieg or a
play of Tchekov. And like all deeply national
art, it is therefore universal.” Hugo Alfven, the
Swedish composer: “Reading Selma Lagerlöf is
like sitting in the dusk of a Spanish cathedral....
Afterward, one does not know whether what he has
seen was dream or reality, but certainly he has been
on holy ground.” The best approach is possibly
through The Story of Gösta Berling. Her other
great novels are Jerusalem, woven from the actual
experience of Swedish colonists in the Holy Land,
and The Emperor of Portugallia. Her Nils stories
for children are mentioned in Chapter 9. Complete
works are best procured in the Northland
Edition.
iii
A convenient size and a beautiful binding are
more than desiderata. Who, wishing Bram Stoker’s
grim masterpiece, Dracula, would not now prefer a
new copy in the handy leather of the Lambskin
Library? If one is out to acquire a copy of W. Somerset
Maugham’s The Moon and Sixpence, will he
not choose it in its plum-coloured leather and gilt
top of the Murray Hill Library? If I go forth to
buy Pride and Prejudice, I am as certain as anything
to ask for it from the volumes of the Modern
Student’s Library, because this will give me William
Dean Howells’s introduction to the novel.
There is a further advantage of these collections
in that they give ready and inexpensive access to
exceptional books that are otherwise out of print.
I might have excessive trouble, for example, to get
hold of Dracula elsewhere. Yet the commonest
advantage of such sets is probably as a guide in
reading. A publisher does not put a book into his
Lambskin Library, or his Murray Hill Library, or
his Modern Student’s Library unless the book is one
of proved worth and established permanence and
continuing popularity. The Library, therefore,
offers a convenient and trustworthy solution to those
who, among books not freshly published, are unable
to see the trees for the forest. A word about these
collections is in order.
The Lambskin Library at present comprises
nearly fifty volumes, chiefly fiction, although Lawrence
F. Abbott’s Impressions of Theodore Roosevelt,
Helen Keller’s The Story of My Life, Booker
T. Washington’s Up From Slavery and Franklin’s
Autobiography lay a massive foundation for biographies.
Conrad, Frank Norris, Selma Lagerlöf,
O. Henry, Dumas, Scott, Tarkington, Edna Ferber,
Ellen Glasgow, Zola and Rider Haggard are some
of the authors represented. Many of the books have
interesting prefatory notes and among the contributors
of these are William Lyon Phelps, Christopher
Morley, William Allen White, John Macy and
William Dean Howells.
The Modern Student’s Library is ultimately to
include as many as possible of the books one would
wish to read in a comprehensive survey of English
and American literature. Both the general reader
and the student have been held in mind; the books
represent a sane departure from the heavily annotated
texts of a few years ago. The books have been
edited, and introductions to them have been provided
by such authorities as William Dean Howells,
Stuart P. Sherman, William Lyon Phelps and Carl
Van Doren. Bacon’s Essays, Boswell’s Life of
Johnson, Browning, Carlyle’s Sartor Resartus,
Emerson’s Essays, Hardy’s The Return of the
Native, Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter, Meredith,
Ruskin, Scott, Stevenson, Thackeray, Thoreau and
Whitman are among those already included.
The Murray Hill Library, commencing with modern
fiction, will probably enlarge its scope to include
some of the best modern non-fiction. Its very
handsome binding now covers twelve books, picked
works by Arnold Bennett, Somerset Maugham,
Mary Roberts Rinehart, Irvin S. Cobb, Walpole,
G. A. Birmingham, John Buchan, Stephen McKenna,
Swinnerton and Richard Dehan.
Of an entirely different character but not less
valuable are the very large volumes of the Nature
Library—those volumes by Neltje Blanchan, Julia
Ellen Rogers, Nina L. Marshall and others called
(for the most part) The Butterfly Book, The Shell
Book, The Tree Book, and so on. Fairly expensive
books, these, but cheap at any price with their many
and wonderful colour plates and photographs from
life. In their outdoor field they are not to be
surpassed.
iv
Books of a biographical character we have considered
already (Chapter 8) but it ought to be
emphasised that, for the investor in literature, they
hold a position quite as enviable and altogether
desirable as does the class of securities known as
municipals for the investor of moneys. Time will
not match for us a book like Booker T. Washington’s
Up From Slavery, nor will literature furnish
us with a more strangely suggestive career than that
related in Raymond Weaver’s Herman Melville:
Mariner and Mystic. It was C. Alphonso Smith’s
O. Henry Biography that first gave the world the
facts on which to base a true understanding of that
extraordinary writer. The tale of unwearied courage
in Edward Livingston Trudeau’s Autobiography
cannot lose either its freshness nor its strength of
inspiration. To read P. P. Howe’s Life of William
Hazlitt and then to turn to his little book of
selections called The Best of Hazlitt is to enter
into a permanently valuable share of the English
literary inheritance. The Letters of Henry James,
selected and edited by Percy Lubbock, and James’s
own Notes of a Son and Brother; Sir Sidney Colvin’s
John Keats and his Memories and Notes of
Persons and Places; the Letters of James Huneker
and Huneker’s autobiography, Steeplejack; and the
Letters and Papers of John Addington Symonds,
edited by Horatio F. Brown, are all of the class of
books whose content is a permanent acquisition, an
actual “property” of which the reader, in legal
language, becomes seized and possessed.
One’s investment in an ample author should be
allowed to ramify in all directions natural to the
lines of human interest. About Walt Whitman,
for example, there is by now a cluster of books
which the reader of Leaves of Grass or of Whitman’s
prose cannot afford, in their entirety, to
neglect. Whether he will want one or all, or what
ones he will want, will depend upon the relation he
establishes with Whitman himself. The best brief
biography is Walt Whitman: The Man and His
Work, translated from the French of Leon Bazalgette
by Ellen FitzGerald. Personally I do not
think one can feel himself acquainted with Whitman
unless he has read, or read in, the three massive
volumes of Horace Traubel’s With Walt Whitman
in Camden. The Letters of Anne Gilchrist and
Walt Whitman, edited by Thomas B. Harned, form
an unusual and engrossing chapter in the lives of
both. Those keenly interested will explore further
yet in the two volumes of the Uncollected Poetry
and Prose of Walt Whitman, edited by Emory
Holloway, who is now at work on a long and comprehensive
biography of the poet.
The book with beautiful illustrations is a true
investment, since now such illustrations are seldom
if ever wasted on a second-rate text. To a great
extent these illustrated books are ones appreciable
by children as well as by their elders—things like
Westward Ho! and The Last of the Mohicans—and
came up for our consideration in Chapter 9.
But there are certain classics, like the editions of
A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Milton’s Comus
with pictures by Arthur Rackham, which are adult
throughout. One of the most splendid is the Vierge
Edition of Don Quixote, in four volumes, illustrated
with 260 drawings by Daniel Vierge and provided
with an introduction by Royal Cortissoz.
The same work, illustrated by Jean de Bosschere,
may be had in one large volume; and other treasures
of the sort are The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
and Shakespeare’s The Tempest, both illustrated
by Edmund Dulac. I must not omit the edition of
Scott’s Quentin Durward, with illustrations in color
by the American artist, C. Bosseron Chambers.
When, in Chapter 2, we discussed books of
essays, it was with the thought of their beguiling
qualities pretty much forward in our minds. I hope
I do not derogate the essay, a literary form raised
to the highest eminence by Bacon, Emerson, Lamb
and so many others, when I say that its widest and
most useful office resembles the form of investment
known as short-term notes. Investors of money are
constantly in receipt of funds for which, at the
moment, they have no suitable repository; and investors
in literature are frequently in the same fix.
The man with money buys high grade commercial
paper with an early maturity and watches for his
long-term investment. The reader with time on his
hands may often most profitably do likewise. But
in one respect he is the more favoured person. If
his brief-lived investment is well-chosen, the chances
are great that it will lead him to some author or
some group of books to which he can gladly commit
his reading hours for a month or several months or
a year.
Such, among literary profit-producers, are books
like Stuart P. Sherman’s The Genius of America
and his Americans, the first devoted to “studies in
behalf of the younger generation” of such subjects
as Puritanism, shifting morals, popular education
and American critical writing; the second a series
of presentations of individual figures—Roosevelt,
Emerson, Whitman, Carnegie, Paul Elmer More,
Franklin, and others. Either his On or his fictional
satire, The Mercy of Allah, should lead the chance
reader some ways further in the conquest of Hilaire
Belloc. Dr. Joseph Collins’s The Doctor Looks at
Literature has, in a very few months, created and
aborted some thousands of readers of James Joyce,
Fyodor Dostoievski, Marcel Proust, D. H. Lawrence,
May Sinclair, Rebecca West, Stella Benson,
Katherine Mansfield and the other contemporary
writers whose pathology it inquires into. Books
about books have all the range from Jesse Lee Bennett’s
invaluable reader’s Baedeker, What Books
Can Do for Me (with priceless reading lists of every
variety) to Maurice Francis Egan’s delightful Confessions
of a Book-Lover and Henry van Dyke’s
Companionable Books. What will you try? John
Corbin’s The Return of the Middle Class with its
impulsion toward other social studies? J. H.
Gardiner’s The Bible as English Literature or William
Lyon Phelps’s Human Nature in the Bible
with their lights upon ancient thinking and racial
character? Corbin’s book may lead you back to Edward
Carpenter’s Civilization: Its Cause and Cure.
Gardiner and Phelps may send you to Horace G.
Hutchinson’s The Greatest Story in the World,
which is the story of mankind from the beginnings
of history to the time of the firm establishment of
the Roman Empire. From that picturesque history
of the civilisations that succeeded each other in the
Mediterranean lands would you be led in the direction
of Henry Fairfield Osborn’s Men of the Old
Stone Age and Madison Grant’s The Passing of the
Great Race, or toward the recent books by Lothrop
Stoddard, or into the fascinations of Edwyn Bevan’s
Hellenism and Christianity and G. Lowes Dickinson’s
The Greek View of Life, I wonder? As one
wishful of your enjoyment and satisfaction, I hope
you wonder, too.
Here, of all things, is A History of Chinese Literature,
by Herbert A. Giles, professor of Chinese in
the University of Cambridge (you didn’t know they
had one, did you?). It begins with Confucius (born
B.C. 551) and is divided into eight parts according
to dynasties. One sees easily that while each age
had its poets and writers, the drama and the novel
did not develop in China until the Mongol Dynasty
(A.D. 1200) and the famous Ming Dynasty (A.D.
1368-1544). From all the important writers Dr.
Giles quotes at length in excellent translation; he
summarises plays and explains the curious technique
of the Chinese theatre. The book is rounded off
with examples of Chinese wit and humour.
Here is George H. McKnight’s English Words
and Their Background, with facts only recently
recognised about the relation and differences of
American English and British English; with a good
chapter on slang; with new light on the changes
word meanings have undergone, and why; with stuff
about personal names and place names.
The general reader has perhaps tried to find out
about Dante, and found, on the one hand, some
work by the scholar and for the scholar, on the
other, books full of technical and controversial
idiom. Behold, here is Mary Bradford Whiting’s
Dante: The Man and the Poet with its simple and
memorable account of the student, lover and statesman,
the exile and wanderer, the poet and seer. Or
he has wondered if it were impossible for anyone
to write about sex with beauty and sanity—and
then has had the miracle of getting hold of Havelock
Ellis’s Little Essays of Love and Virtue
wrought in his behalf. He has been the victim all
his life of such stuff as Freudians are made on, and
some benignant fate has put into his hands Basil
King’s convincing account of The Conquest of Fear.
He has wearied over the Younger Generation and
been comforted as he read Brander Matthew’s The
Tocsin of Revolt; contemporary criticism—too contemporary—has
set his teeth on edge until he found
a more ripened wisdom in the books of W. C.
Brownell. A sense of futility and a dark brown
taste of boredom have resulted from the perusal of
the usual kind of book on How to Live; and the
sparkling and nutritious antidote has proved to be
Arnold Bennett’s How to Make the Best of Life.
For that condition in which one cannot endure
concentration on a single topic for the duration of
a book—what? Perhaps either volume of Bennett’s
Things That Have Interested Me, or some
such book as Basil Anderton’s Sketches From a
Library Window, in which one may read about a
French gourmet, a sixteenth century humanist,
holiday joys in Northumberland, the art of the
translator, the adventures of an English seaman in
the Napoleonic wars, or Sir Thomas Browne.
v
“I never read fiction.”
The next time I meet him I shall not place in
his hands a novel, not even one of the great masterpieces
among the novels. I shall hand him My
Best Story, to which thirty-one English authors have
contributed (though we may claim John Russell
for America). Here in a single book are such perfect
tales as Stacy Aumonier’s “The Great Unimpressionable,”
one from Ernest Bramah’s Kai
Lung’s Golden Hours, Quiller-Couch’s “Statement
of Gabriel Foot, Highwayman,” Galsworthy’s
“Courage,” Perceval Gibbon’s “The Connoisseur,”
Cunninghame Graham’s “The Lone Wolf,” Elinor
Mordaunt’s “The Gold Fish,” John Russell’s “The
Price of a Head” and Rebecca West’s “In a City
That Is Now Ploughed Fields.” Arnold Bennett,
G. K. Chesterton, W. W. Jacobs, May Sinclair,
H. G. Wells and Israel Zangwill are some of the
others who furnish stories for the collection. Such
a book, by its variety as well as from its superlative
quality, ought to win him to fiction more readily
than any long tale, however distinguished.
He is rare, but you do sometimes meet him, that
type of literary investor who cannot trust himself
to range over the whole field ... like one whose
fortune, however great, must needs be kept strictly
in savings bank accounts. I grant you that one
needs to know his fiction, both in itself and in relation
to his possible profit. But I personally would
not for the world be one of those who have never
heard of Charles De Coster’s Legend of Ulenspiegel,
that classic of the Lowland countries which Hendrik
Van Loon named recently as one of the ten
books he has enjoyed the most. I should not be
willing to be ignorant of “Elizabeth,” whose Vera
had such grim power and whose The Enchanted
April made a good many enchanted Mays, Junes,
Julys, Augusts and other months for its readers.
Of what avail to have read novels by Kathleen
Norris and to have missed Certain People of Importance,
I should like to know? Who thinks he
has any acquaintance with the work of Edna Ferber
if he has omitted to read The Girls or such tales, in
Gigolo, as “Old Man Minnick” and “Home Girl”?
Yet there are unfortunate persons who read One
Man in His Time and who will read the stories in
The Shadowy Third and innocently suppose they
have “read” Ellen Glasgow, that competent and
admirable novelist whose earlier novels, like The
Deliverance, have such surprising vitality when you
read or re-read them today.
Opportunities lost? Ah, but one of the grand
advantages of the literary investment over the
money opportunity is right here: Your new and
worthwhile book and your old and seasoned book
are, alike, always offering.
16. Naturalist vs. Novelist: Gene Stratton-Porter
i
WITH Gene Stratton-Porter, the quality of enthusiasm
is not strained, it droppeth as torrential
rains from the heaven of her state of mind.
Anyone acquainted with Mrs. Porter and regarding
her with positive affection is certain to be subject to
the recurring notion that she has, after all, confused
heaven with earth. It is not that she finds nothing
on earth to contemn, but that she finds the same
objects for perpetual glorification. The rest of us
live our wavering lives in a flux of emotions, which
we commonly mistake for accomplishments of our
intellects. We glorify this at one age, and that at
another. Mrs. Porter, from the beginning, has worshipped
the same pantheon.
A pantheon it is, owing to her possibly inherited
passion for the works of nature. Her idea of art
is as clear-cut as the ordinary mortal’s notion of
property. Perhaps clearer, since the ordinary
mortal often finds difficulty in distinguishing the
forms of property, whether real, personal, or mixed
(as lawyers say). To Mrs. Porter, art is any
human effort that encourages, or even possibly
forces, nature to grow. It is art when you handle
flowers with the deftness and astonishing results
achieved by Mrs. Porter’s mother; it is art when you
write a story that tends to stimulate or fortify the
natural (i.e., usual) impulses of the average man
or woman to live and learn, to seek and engage in
interesting work, to mate, to beget or bear children.
Any art that does not tend directly toward these
primary social and personal ends isn’t art to her;
she regards it with heavy suspicion.
Some years ago it was suggested to Mrs. Porter
that she furnish autobiographical material for a
booklet which should satisfy the eager requests of
her readers for personal facts. Mrs. Porter assented.
The result was a booklet largely in her
own words, and remarkable for an accent that some
would call boastful and others, refreshing. We may
defer for a few moments the details that Mrs. Porter
set down, but the question of her personal tone and
temper is one to be considered at the very outset. Is
she merely naïve? Is she self-assertive, conceited,
boastful? What does she embody, and what is the
secret—if it is a secret—of the enormously wide appeal
of her work? To attempt an answer isn’t easy.
But let us see....
ii
Gene Stratton-Porter is a self-made woman, with
all the drawbacks that self-manufacture entails.
Certain definite advantages, too! It is not meant
that she owes nothing to her parentage, wifehood,
motherhood—she owes much to these, and her
great indebtedness to her father and mother she has
herself proclaimed. And yet, in the rôle in which
the world views her, she owes nothing to anybody
except herself. For although the late Richard
Watson Gilder gave her encouragement with her
first book, and although others encouraged her with
the famous Freckles, she would undoubtedly have
gone on with no encouragement whatever and would
have become what she is today. Why? The explanation
inheres in that phrase, “self-made.”
Self-made people, whatever they may lack, are obviously
people with a capacity which we don’t
ordinarily bother to distinguish except by the result
they achieve with it. That is, perhaps, typical of
the mental laziness of the rest of us. But if we
ask ourselves what the capacity is, in terms other
than the easily-named result, the answer may be
extremely surprising.
Who are the persons who are so happily independent
of the encouragement, the approval, the
applause without a tiny measure of which the rest
of us couldn’t go on? They divide into the two
great classes of mankind, if we consider psychology
and temperament. There are the mystics—the
saints, the martyrs, and some artists. There are the
non-mystics—many artists among them, to be sure.
The mystical mind isn’t the secret. The mental
make-up of those who walk (who are able to walk)
by themselves, is. They have, either from birth
or by hard-wrung conquest, a kind of self-sufficiency
more precious, for living purposes, than fine gold.
It may be the bright, unconscious self-sufficiency
of a Gene Stratton-Porter, or the admirable fortitude
of a Joseph Conrad or the diffident charm of
a Booth Tarkington—the manner is nothing; it is
there. The mode of acquisition, except as it bears
on work and affects personality, whether birthright
or painful purchase, is nothing, either. The thing
is there, like driven piles or bedrock. He who lacks
that foundation must take his chance of his house,
built on sands, being washed away.
With Mrs. Porter this invaluable element of personality
has existed from the time of her earliest
childhood. Nor is the faculty in question a superficial
matter, like self-confidence. It was with a
considerable lack of self-confidence that Mrs. Porter
began writing; but notice that she began. How
many others who had the self-confidence when they
started have had to acquire the self-sufficiency, the
power of self-sustention? How many have failed
to do that? Self-confidence, indeed, is the most
perfect of traitors. But there is a reservoir in the
Self....
Like every other prize, this one has its penalty.
What will carry one to the top of a high rock will
also, unimpeded, carry one over the rock’s edge.
The balance in egoism always trembles; when it
comes to rest, one dies. And here is Mrs. Porter,
who had in her a capacity that could have overcome
mountains and that found only moderately difficult
hills in its path. She must have burst into a thousand
pieces if it hadn’t been that she was a naturalist
first and a novelist afterward, that she underwent
the preoccupations of a wife and mother, that
she toiled in swamps and wrote books, kept other
people alive with her money as well as her courage
and vitality, launched forth on self-pinions as a
poet, corresponded with innumerable readers, did
this and that and the other and then hit upon something
else. She was one of twelve children. “To
this mother at forty-six and this father at fifty,
each at intellectual topnotch,” she was born, the
Minerva of mature and remarkable parents, a child
who kept, in her own words, “thinking things which
she felt should be saved,” so that she frequently
tugged at her mother’s skirts and begged her to “set
down” what the child considered stories and poems—generally
some big fact in nature that thrilled
the child, usually expressed in Biblical terms.
Whom have we here? An incarnation as extraordinary
as the Florence Nightingale whom Lytton
Strachey put on paper? I think so.
iii
Mark Stratton, the father of Gene Stratton-Porter,
described his wife, at the time of their marriage,
as a “ninety-pound bit of pink porcelain, pink
as a wild rose, plump as a partridge, having a big
rope of bright brown hair, never ill a day in her life,
and bearing the loveliest name ever given a woman—Mary.
God fashioned her heart to be gracious,
her body to be the mother of children, and as her
especial gift of Grace, He put Flower Magic into
her fingers.”
From tiny seeds found in rice and coffee, Mary
(Shellenbarger) Stratton started little vines and
climbing plants. Rooted things she soaked in
water, rolled in fine sand, planted according to
habit, and they almost never failed to grow. When,
intent on growing a tree or shrub from a slip or
cutting that appeared hopeless, she cut the slip
diagonally, inserted the lower end in a small potato
and planted as if it were rooted, she was nearly
always successful. Being of Dutch extraction,
bulbs were her favourites—tulips, daffodils, star
flowers, lilies, dahlias, little bright hyacinths that
she called “blue bells.” From these she distilled
perfume by putting clusters, at the time of perfect
bloom, in bowls lined with freshly made, unsalted
butter, covering them closely, and cutting the few
drops of extract thus obtained with alcohol. In
Ohio a man gave her two tiny cedars of Lebanon
which she brought with her to the farm in Wabash
County, Indiana, planting one in her front yard
and one in the small cemetery on the corner of her
husband’s land. It stands, thirty feet tall or over,
two feet in circumference, guarding her grave.
All twelve of her children lived to be eight; an
attack of scarlet fever joined with whooping cough
was fatal to two of them a little over that age.
The house, “Hopewell Farm,” was an oblong box
kept speckless. The liberal table and appetising
food were known by all who travelled that way.
She made the clothing for her brood. In the house
that she kept so faultlessly clean, at the table she
heaped with hearty dishes, Mark Stratton, conscious
of his worthy British blood, praised her “tidiness”
and accepted responsibility for the mental and
spiritual welfare of his wife and children. It was
understood that he had been named for a Mark
Stratton who lived in New York and married a
beauty, Anne Hutchinson. It was misunderstood
that the first Mark and his wife settled on Stratton
Island, “afterward corrupted to Staten.” From
this point back for generations across the ocean, we
are told that Mrs. Porter’s father “followed his line
to the family of Strattons of which the Earl of
Northbrooke is the present head (1913). To his
British traditions and the customs of his family,
Mark Stratton clung with rigid tenacity, never
swerving from his course a particle under the influence
of environment or association.” Perhaps,
after all, he was British. “All his ideas were
clear-cut; no man could influence him against
his better judgment. He believed in God, in
courtesy, in honour, and cleanliness, in beauty, and
in education. He used to say that he would rather
see a child of his the author of a book of which he
could be proud than on the throne of England,
which was the strongest way he knew to express
himself.” It is not too highly imaginative, I am
sure, to believe that Mr. Stratton also planted slips
and cuttings successfully; but they were slips of
his own tenacious mind and they were planted most
successfully in the receptive mind of his daughter,
Gene.
We must note Mr. Stratton rather carefully.
“His very first earnings he spent for a book; when
other men rested, he read”—toiling upward in the
night, in that time of Longfellowship, that has since
been abandoned for fifteen minutes a day, in this
era of Eliotry. The memory of Mr. Stratton
enabled him to quote paragraphs at a time from
Hume, Macaulay, Gibbon, Prescott and Bancroft—he
was perhaps fondest of history—while as for
the Bible, he could repeat it entire, his daughter
says, except for the genealogies, and give chapter
and verse. The genealogies were “a waste of grey
matter to learn.” Mrs. Porter confesses: “I was
almost afraid to make these statements, although
there are many living who can corroborate them,
until John Muir published the story of his boyhood
days, and in it I found the history of such rearing
as was my father’s, told of as the customary thing
among the children of Muir’s time.”
Sermons, lectures, talks on civic improvement and
politics, delivered without thought of personal
fatigue or selfish inconvenience at the end of journeys
of many miles were Mark Stratton’s contribution
to the cause of Good. It seems unkind to
examine such performances dispassionately. “He
worshipped beauty: beautiful faces, souls, hearts,
beautiful landscapes, trees, animals, flowers. He
loved colour: rich, bright colour and every variation
down to the faintest shadings.” Mrs. Porter keeps
a cardinal silk handkerchief that he was carrying
when stricken with apoplexy at the age of seventy-eight.
“Over inspired Biblical passages, over great
books, over sunlit landscapes, over a white violet
abloom in deep shade, over a heroic deed of man,
I have seen his brow light up, his eyes shine.” He
used especially to thrill his young daughter by the
story of John Maynard, who piloted a burning boat
to safety while he slowly roasted at the wheel.
That he should tell it was natural, since the telling
gave him opportunity to reproduce, with many inflections,
the captain’s cry of “John Maynard!”
and the answer, “Aye, aye, sir!” echoed until it sank
to a mere gasp, a whisper....
iv
Gene Stratton was only a few years old when her
mother, who had once nursed three of the children
through typhoid fever, contracting it herself, broke
down. Mrs. Stratton lived for several years, suffering
continually, frequently tortured by pain. The
youngest child was therefore allowed to follow an
impulse and escape the training given her sisters.
She followed her father and brothers outdoors,
sleeping on their coats in fence corners, awakening,
sometimes, to find shy creatures peering into her
face. “I trotted from one object which attracted
me to another, singing a little song of made-up
phrases about everything I saw while I waded, catching
fish, chasing butterflies over clover fields, or
following a bird with a hair in its beak; much of
the time I carried the inevitable baby for a woman-child,
frequently improvised from an ear of corn
in the silk, wrapped in catalpa leaf blankets.” She
made special pets of birds. She had been taught
that they were useful and had “a gift of Grace in
their beauty and music, things to be rigidly protected.
From this cue I evolved the idea myself
that I must be extremely careful, for had not my
father tied a ’kerchief over my mouth when he lifted
me for a peep into the nest of the humming-bird,
and did he not walk softly and whisper when
he approached the spot? So I stepped lightly,
made no noise, and watched until I knew what a
mother bird fed her young before I began dropping
bugs, worms, crumbs, and fruit into little red
mouths that opened at my tap on the nest quite
as readily as at the touch of the feet of the mother
bird.”
All this life became a thing of memory just before
the mother’s death. Then they left the farm and
went to town, to the city of Wabash, that Mrs.
Stratton might have constant medical attention.
The ninety-pound bit of pink porcelain, plump as
a wild partridge, the little Dutch woman who had
borne twelve children and kept a spotless farmhouse
and heaped up good things on the long dinner table,
lay with her head on a pillow, a cinnamon pink or a
trillium placed where its fragrance would reach her
with every breath she drew. She was dying. She
had helped Mark Stratton with the bush- and vine-covered
fences that crept around the acres they
owned in a strip of gaudy colour; she shared the
achievement of that orchard, lying in a valley, with
its square of apple trees in the centre, so that at
the time of blossoming it appeared as if a great
pink-bordered white blanket had been let down on
the earth. To her equally with her husband was
due the presence on shale, which they might have
drained, of sheets of blue flag, marigold and buttercups.
All this was going out of her children’s life
and she was going out with it. The youngest child,
in particular, had been leading a harum-scarum
existence; if she reported promptly three times a
day when the bell rang at meal times, with enough
clothing to constitute a decent covering, nothing
more was asked of her until the Sabbath. Mary
Stratton was perhaps about to be released, to receive
the benefit of a freedom in which, if her hands were
not busy, it was not likely she would be happy or
know what to do. Gene Stratton, whose father permitted
his youngest to idolise him, was to be taken
from outdoor freedom, her feet shod, her body restricted
by the burden of Sunday clothing, her
active legs stilled to a shuffle beneath the desk of a
close schoolroom, and her mind set to droning over
books. Unfortunately she came to the ordeal with
no purely feminine resources of inattention, preoccupation
or indifference. Her father had seen to
that. It was he who was responsible for the child
that revelled in Paul and Virginia, Undine,
Picciola, The Vicar of Wakefield, Pilgrim’s Progress—“exquisitely
expressed and conceived stories”
that “may have done much in forming high conceptions
of what really constitutes literature,
and in furthering the lofty ideals instilled by my
parents.” Mrs. Porter adds: “One of these stories
formed the basis of my first publicly recognised
literary effort.” She was assigned to write a
class composition on “Mathematical Law.” She
postponed, rebelled, wrote a paper retelling the
story of Picciola and in fear and defiance read it
aloud in class. After one page the teacher halted
her while she summoned in the superintendent of
city schools to hear the sixteen foolscap pages from
the beginning. “One instant the room was in laughter,
the next the boys bowed their heads, and the
girls who had forgotten their handkerchiefs cried in
their aprons. Never again was a subject forced
upon me.” She was her father’s daughter, and her
father was Mark Stratton.
“My mother went out too soon to know, and my
father never saw one of my books; but he knew I
was boiling and bubbling like a yeast jar in July
over some literary work, and if I timidly slipped
to him with a composition, or a faulty poem, he saw
good in it, and made suggestions for its betterment.
When I wanted to express something in colour, he
went to an artist, sketched a design for an easel,
personally superintended the carpenter who built
it, and provided tuition. On that same easel I
painted the water colours for Moths of the Limberlost,
and one of the most poignant regrets of my
life is that he was not there to see them, and to
know that the easel which he built through his
faith in me was finally used in illustrating a book.
“If I thought it was music through which I could
express myself, he paid for lessons and detected
hidden ability which should be developed. Through
the days of struggle he stood fast; firm in his belief
in me. He was half the battle. It was he who
demanded a physical standard that developed
strength to endure the rigours of scientific field and
darkroom work, and the building of ten books in
ten years, five of which were on nature subjects,
having my own illustrations, and five novels, literally
teeming with natural history, true to nature.
It was he who demanded of me from birth the finishing
of any task I attempted and who taught me
to cultivate patience to watch and wait, even years,
if necessary, to find and secure the material I
wanted. It was he who daily lived before me the
life of exactly such a man as I portrayed in The
Harvester, and who constantly used every atom of
brain and body power to help and to encourage all
men to do the same.”
No further illumination should be needed on the
most extraordinary personal influence in Mrs. Porter’s
life.
v
Gene Stratton was married in 1886, at the age
of eighteen, to Charles Darwin Porter, of Wabash,
Indiana. Marriage, a home of her own, and a
daughter were successively brought to bear upon a
nature already powerful; none of them succeeded
in eradicating the impress of Mark Stratton. The
new home was a cabin of fourteen rooms (at first),
standing on some fifteen acres near the Limberlost
Swamp. The familiar address runs: “Limberlost
Cabin, Rome City, Indiana.” Red, white, pink,
blue, lavender and yellow flower-beds of an acre
apiece were laid off in the deep woods running down
the shore of a lake; the cabin stands in the middle
of the yellow bed, a dwelling of large rooms and
four fireplaces, two of which Mrs. Porter built, to
a large extent, herself. One is of pudden stone, red
and blue pebbles; another, in the living room, is
constructed of field boulders split to expose their
quartz crystals that sparkle under artificial light.
The windows were built with broad, deep casements
especially to furnish feeding-tables for birds. On
the open, cement-floored porch may stand in winter
wheat, apples, cabbage and celery bunches. Chickadees,
titmice, nuthatches, sapsuckers, flickers, song
sparrows, jays, cardinals and squirrels come to the
sills to eat the chopped wheat, ground corn and suet
put out for them.
But this is to mix past and the comparative present.
It was not long before Mrs. Porter’s daughter
was old enough to go to school. “I knew how to
manage life to make it meet my needs, thanks to
even the small amount I had seen of my mother.
I kept a cabin of fourteen rooms and kept it immaculate.
I made most of my daughter’s clothes,
I kept a conservatory in which there bloomed from
three to six hundred bulbs every winter, tended a
house of canaries and linnets, and cooked and
washed dishes, besides, three times a day. In my
spare time (mark the word, there was time to spare
else the books never would have been written and
the pictures made) I mastered photography ...”
but we need not go with her into the details of this
one among many of her personal triumphs. She was
for two years editor of the camera department of
Recreation, for two years on the natural history
staff of Outing, for four years specialist in natural
history photography on the Photographic Times
Annual Almanac. She had a dread of failure and,
at first, carried on her special work as secretly as
possible. “My husband owned a drug and book
store that carried magazines, but only a few people
in our locality read these, none were interested in
nature photography or natural science; so what I
was trying to do was not realised even by my own
family. I did not want to fail before my man
person and my daughter and our respective families.”
She was further afraid of ridicule in a community
“where I was already severely criticised on
account of my ideas of housekeeping, dress and
social customs.” When she first attempted “nature
studies sugar-coated with fiction” she proceeded
with the same furtiveness. “I who waded morass,
fought quicksands, crept, worked from ladders high
in air, and crossed water on improvised rafts without
a tremor, slipped with many misgivings into the
postoffice and rented a box for myself, so that if I
met with failure my husband and the men in the
bank”—Mr. Porter was president of the Bank of
Geneva—“need not know.” Through loss of her
address at the New York end, she waited unanswered
until one day, months later, when she
went into “our store” on an errand and the storekeeper
said: “I read your story in the Metropolitan
last night. It was great! Did you ever write
any fiction before?” Mrs. Porter relates: “My
head whirled, but I had learned to keep my own
counsels, so I said as lightly as I could, while my
heart beat until I feared he could hear it, ‘No.
Just a simple little thing! Have you any spare
copies? My sister might want one.’”
The appearance of her first story led to an order
for a second, to be illustrated with her own photographs.
She had a day, or less, to fill the request
for photographs, and kept a number of persons up
all night to pose for her. The genesis of Freckles,
her second book, was the discovery by lumbermen
of a nest of the black vulture in the Limberlost
Swamp. Her husband, whose business had compelled
him to allow her to work alone but who was
also a natural history enthusiast, insisted that he
must go with her. “A Limberlost trip at that time
was not to be joked about. The swamp had not
been shorn, branded, and tamed. There were most
excellent reasons why I should not go there. Much
of it was impenetrable. Only a few trees had been
taken out; oilmen were just invading it. In its
physical aspect it was a treacherous swamp and
quagmire filled with every plant, animal, and
human danger known in the worst of such locations
in the Central States.
“A rod inside the swamp on a road leading to an
oil well we mired to the carriage hubs. I shielded
my camera in my arms and before we reached the
well I thought the conveyance would be torn to
pieces and the horse stalled. At the well we started
on foot, Mr. Porter in kneeboots, I in waist-high
waders. The time was late June; we forced our
way between steaming, fetid pools, through swarms
of gnats, flies, mosquitoes, poisonous insects, keeping
a sharp watch for rattlesnakes. We sank ankle
deep at every step, and logs we thought solid broke
under us. Our progress was a steady succession of
prying and pulling each other to the surface. Our
clothing was wringing wet, and the exposed parts
of our bodies lumpy with bites and stings. My
husband found the tree, cleared the opening to the
great prostrate log, traversed its unspeakable odours
for nearly forty feet to its farthest recess, and
brought the baby and egg to the light in his leaf-lined
hat.
“We could endure the location only by dipping
napkins in deodorant and binding them over our
mouths and nostrils. Every third day for almost
three months we made this trip, until Little Chicken
was able to take wing.”
The idea of Freckles came one day when they
were leaving the swamp. A big feather with a shaft
over twenty inches long came spinning and swirling
earthward, and fell in Mrs. Porter’s path. It was
an eagle’s feather, but although she instantly looked
aloft, Mrs. Porter’s well-trained eyes could not
catch sight of the bird. She has always regretted
that to her story the title Freckles was given; her
wish was for “The Falling Feather”—that tangible
thing drifting down out of Nowhere, just as the
boy came in the story of her fashioning.
The insertion of marginal drawings of nature
subjects in Freckles made a distinct impression get
abroad that it was simply a nature book, with the
result that three long years were required for the
novel to attain its enormous popularity. Published
in 1904, the book had sold, ten years later, 670,733
copies in the regular edition.
vi
Mrs. Porter as an author is now fairly before us
and may be considered profitably before we take a
look at her newest novel, The White Flag. So
familiar a phenomenon calls for incisive comment.
She writes her stories “exactly as they take shape in
my mind” and the excisions are sometimes—as in
the case of Her Father’s Daughter, which yet remained
overlong—quite heavy. The edited and
published fiction is of itself remarkable for an unrestraint,
a vigorous emphasis, a masculine zeal, with
which there is generally combined freshness of feeling
and a transparent sincerity. It is this sincerity,
proceeding as it so often does from a total unconsciousness
of what lies behind it, that the popular
instinct detects at once in the pages of a work of
fiction. It has, of course, nothing whatever to do
with literary art, it is never shamed or enriched by
the processes of introspection, and in this it conforms
to the wilful egoism fundamental with the Northern
races in a new country and exploitable environment.
The student of psychology may be interested, for
more reasons than the inheritance of Holland ancestry,
to compare the late Theodore Roosevelt and
Gene Stratton-Porter in personalities and characters.
Each has swayed the millions; each, beyond all
possible question, has influenced human lives.
Neither was oppressed by the enormous responsibility
attached to such a rôle. I would not say that
the one had more education than has the other, but
their educations were different.
“To spend time writing a book based wholly
upon human passion and its outworking I would
not,” exclaims Mrs. Porter, to whom art is an expression
of flower-beds and children a-plenty, censored
books and human lives lived on sober and
industrious models. And she compromised on a
book “into which I put all the nature work that
came naturally within its scope, and seasoned it
with little bits of imagination and straight copy
from the lives of men and women I had known intimately,
folk who lived in a simple, common way
with which I was familiar.” In simple justice it
should be pointed out that she insisted upon alternating
nature books and novels, although far more
money could be earned by writing only fiction.
Just as the child was taken from the fields, shoed
and harnessed in “Sunday clothes” and put into
school, so the naturalist was torn, though somewhat
more gently and gradually, from her proper enjoyments
and placed in the trammels of book-length
fiction. What wonder that she revolted?—but the
rebellion of Picciola, though ending in personal
triumph, was not the end of school; and the rebellion
of the novelist, though rewarded with a tremendous
personal triumph, did not end her ordeal of novel-writing.
What people like Mrs. Porter never
achieve is a successful rebellion from, within, themselves.
Something more powerful than they quells
their self-insurrections; they go on; money seems
worth while for what can be done with it to give
happiness and widen opportunity for others; the
task is good—why? It is a task; something that
must be done very thoroughly. The father, Mark
Stratton, to whom his daughter was so observably
devoted, gave her a set of ideals that were to lift
her up, like strong links of iron, and then to turn
into rigid chains. She who owes so much to him
owes to him more than she has ever suspected, a
compulsion put upon her from within herself, the
final reward or fate of every worshipper.
She has tried to escape. She has written poetry.
There was The Fire Bird; and lately there has
been Euphorbia, a long narrative published serially
to the astonishment of readers of Good Housekeeping.
The subject of Euphorbia is interesting—a
woman to whom marriage brings non-fulfilment,
whose husband tramples and uproots the red-and-white
wild flower she loves. When at length the
man dies, the mother has one fearful moment in
which her child reaches toward a bit of euphorbia
with she knows not which intention. But he loves
it. Escape! It is not necessary to make as much
of this as the psychoanalyst would make of it, nor,
perhaps, to miss the mark so widely. “My life has
been fortunate,” Mrs. Porter admits, “in one glad
way: I have lived mostly in the country and worked
in the woods. For every bad man and woman I
have known I have met, lived with, and am intimately
acquainted with an overwhelming number
of thoroughly clean and decent people who still believe
in God and cherish high ideals, and it is
upon the lives of these that I base what I
write.” There is a puzzling fierceness in the
attacks she launches on those who write otherwise;
she is vulnerable somewhere in this connection or
she would show less heat and animosity. And, to
some extent, her active resentment is justified, for
she has had a heavy experience of misleading praise
and some experience of hypocrisy. I remember an
occasion upon which she wrote to me, with scornful
inflections, to lay before me the evidence in the case
of a certain well-known writer who had enthusiastically
praised her work, though “not for publication.”
It was a course which, like herself, I should
join in condemning; but was it so much of a matter?
Did, could, the voice of a single one, count for much
where she had heard already the open voices of
praise from so many thousands? And if it was so,
then why?
Who answers that will make possibly the largest
single contribution to the psychology of literature,
for this identical question finally arises in the case
of writers great and small.
vii
Never, perhaps, has Mrs. Porter been more herself
than in her latest book, The White Flag; although
Her Father’s Daughter, as originally written, was
overgrown. Both these books are autobiography—Her
Father’s Daughter of the heart, The White
Flag of mind and memory. If Mrs. Porter has but
one story to tell, no one has succeeded in telling it
so often with such freshness of feeling or such repeated
success in the matter of readers. The White
Flag is the story of Mahala Spellman, daughter and
only child of Mahlon and Elizabeth Spellman.
The opening scenes are laid in the Indiana of the
1880s. The village is called Ashwater. For what
seems an excessive time our attention is concentrated
upon Elizabeth as a little girl and Junior
Moreland as a little boy. Nothing could be more
typical of Mrs. Porter than the attention she bestows
upon her heroine in childhood—the exact
detail of Mahala’s dress, the recorded precision of
her unfailingly correct behaviour. If there is something
unnatural about the child, there is everything
natural to a child in Mrs. Porter’s fiction. In picturing
the richest man in the village Mrs. Porter
blackens his villainy to a pitch where Mr. Moreland
is neither more nor less credible than some
of the characters in, let us say, Way Down East.
Mahala, in ensuing chapters, refuses Junior Moreland
in the face of the fact that his father could
save her father from ruin. Her father fails, and,
broken, dies. Her mother becomes an invalid.
When finally Mahala can truthfully say that all is
lost except self-respect and courage, a deadly blow
is levelled at her self-respect. Some money is stolen.
Circumstantial evidence accuses Mahala, and Ashwater
shuns her.
It will not be supposed that Mrs. Porter fails to
raise up a champion in her heroine’s hour of need.
All along we have been in touch, in close touch,
with Jason. We knew him as a boy, apparently
the washerwoman’s son. We know him as a young
man, springing to Mahala’s relief. There is no real
reason why, in such a situation and with two such
principal characters, Mrs. Porter should not work
miracles. She does.... Of course her point is
that the virtue, goodness and courage of Mahala
and Jason earn their own ample rewards; and the
thousands who are reading The White Flag will
accept this as so.
Books by Gene Stratton-Porter
1903 The Song of the Cardinal
1904 Freckles
1907 What I Have Done With Birds (republished, 1917, as Friends in Feathers)
1908 At the Foot of the Rainbow
1909 A Girl of the Limberlost
1909 Birds of the Bible
1910 Music of the Wild
1911 The Harvester
1912 Moths of the Limberlost
1913 Laddie
1915 Michael O’Halloran
1916 Morning Face
1918 A Daughter of the Land
1920 Homing With the Birds
1921 Her Father’s Daughter
1922 The Fire Bird
1923 White Flag Euphorbia appeared as a serial in Good Housekeeping: January, February, March numbers, 1923.
Sources on Gene Stratton-Porter
Gene Stratton-Porter, A Little Story of Her Life
and Work. This is the booklet, now out of
print, published some ten years ago by DOUBLEDAY,
PAGE & COMPANY, based upon the long self-account
written by Mrs. Porter and prepared by
Eugene F. Saxton.
“An American Bird-Woman.” Anonymous article
in CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL (London and Edinburgh.
New York: International News Company), Part
46, October 1, 1914: page 636.
Private Information.
17. Poetry and Plays
i
IF you look at the poets as they move in their procession
before your eyes, you will see that each is
dressed after the manner of his age—the Elizabethans
in starched ruffs; the men of the Eighteenth
Century in knee-breeches; the men of today in
Homburg hats. And if you listen to their verses
you will hear that each composes, too, after the
manner of his age. For there have been fashions
in poetry as there have been fashions in dress, and
you can tell the period of a poem not only by the
name and date of the poet but by the style and
flavour of the poetry.” From this thought J. F.
Roxburgh has written “a beginner’s introduction
to English poetry” with the charming title, The
Poetic Procession. His brief review of the poets
from the Elizabethans to the men now writing is
felicitous enough. But although I am sure his intention
in the sentences quoted was not literal, the
image of present-day poets in Homburg hats is very
disconcerting. Don Marquis has probably worn
one, thus inviting the visitation of insurance agents.
But I am sure some of his poems have been written
with the wind blowing through his hair. Such
poems as “The Name,” in his Dreams and Dust,
for example, or those “Premonitions” in his Poems
and Portraits. It is as difficult to say, with Marquis,
where the humourist stops in his poetry and
the thinker steps in as to mark the same exit-entrance
in the man’s prose. Sonnets to a Red-Haired
Lady and Famous Love Affairs and a part
of Poems and Portraits are supposed to belong to
Marquis the jester; but, of the second-named book,
which part? “The man who has laughed lest he
should weep, the clown of the seven times broken
heart” is Richard Le Gallienne’s apt characterisation
of Marquis. I am not sure that “The Tom Cat” in
Poems and Portraits is a bit less “serious” than such
a poem as “Inhibition” in the same collection.
Behind the placid front of use
The baffled whims move to and fro;
We fear to let these genii go....
Sober-faced, we carry hidden within us something
for which the poet has found one of those rare things
in the language, the perfect phrase; it is
The golden nonsense of the heart.
Perhaps we also are like the Tom-cat and, on our
occasions, “chant the hate of a million years.”
He will lie on a rug to-morrow
And lick his silky fur,
And veil the brute in his yellow eyes
And play he’s tame, and purr.
But at midnight in the alley
He will crouch again and wail,
And beat the time for his demon’s song
With the swing of his demon’s tail.
I am as certain that Marquis admires and condones
the Tom-cat as I am that he has sought the troubling
and elusive “Name” which has variously seemed,
as he tells us in his fine poem, to be Love, and
Beauty, and God.
The Boston Evening Transcript spoke not long
ago of “the unhurried ascent of John Hall
Wheelock to the highest rank among contemporary
American poets.” The statement seems to me free
from any exaggeration; and it is encouraging to
think that Mr. Wheelock is in a way to reach the
height more conspicuously than did Edwin Arlington
Robinson, of whom, until his unveiling a few
years ago by fellow poets, the larger public seems
to have remained in a lamentable ignorance. Mr.
Wheelock’s Dust and Light (1919) and his The
Black Panther (1922) have a beauty and sentience
best illustrated by quotation. Here are some lines
from “Earth,” in Dust and Light:
Deftly does the dust express
In mind her hidden loveliness,
And from her cool silence stream
The cricket’s cry and Dante’s dream;
For the earth that breeds the trees
Breeds cities too, and symphonies.
Equally her beauty flows
Into a saviour, or a rose—
Looks down in dream, and from above
Smiles at herself in Jesus’s love.
Christ’s love and Homer’s art
Are but the workings of her heart;
Through Leonardo’s hand she seeks
Herself, and through Beethoven speaks
In holy thunderings around
The awful message of the ground.
The thought is Emersonian, but with Emerson
lyricism was a doubtful and an inconstant capture.
Here is “The Lion-House,” from The Black
Panther, a poem, I cannot but think, that any poet
would be proud to sign:
Always the heavy air,
The dreadful cage, the low
Murmur of voices, where
Some Force goes to and fro
In an immense despair!
As through a haunted brain—
With tireless footfalls
The Obsession moves again,
Trying the floor, the walls,
Forever, but in vain.
In vain, proud Force! A might
Shrewder than yours, did spin
Around your rage that bright
Prison of steel, wherein
You pace for my delight.
And O, my heart, what Doom
What warier Will has wrought
The cage, within whose room
Paces your burning thought,
For the delight of Whom?
The black and silver of cover and jacket on
Elinor Wylie’s second book of poems, Black Armour,
were not so much to match the title as to
convey the colour impression of a number of readers
who had studied the book in manuscript. The
poems, grouped under the names of the parts of a
suit of armour—Breastplate, Gauntlet, Helmet,
Beaver Up, Plumes—perhaps require study, not in
the sense of textual analysis (though they will repay
that) but in the sense of returning to them
several times, so that their compressed emotion may
fully expand itself. I had almost said, explode
itself. Indeed, it may sometimes produce nothing
short of an explosion of feeling in the sensitive
reader. I am thinking now of such works as “Now
That Your Eyes Are Shut” (which opens the section
called Plumes). I have heard the poem “Peregrine”
called the best in the book, the dryly concise
account of a
Liar and bragger,
He had no friend
Except a dagger
And a candle-end
and whose career, the narration of which includes a
dozen feats of rhyming, was summed up when
He spoke this sentence
With a princely air:
“The noose draws tighter;
This is the end;
I’m a good fighter,
But a bad friend:
I’ve played the traitor
Over and over;
I’m a good hater,
But a bad lover.”
But “Fable,” with its effects in twenty-four lines
as powerful as Coleridge’s in his Ancient Mariner,
and “Lucifer Sings in Secret” are to me finer than
“Peregrine” because more individual. I mean that
I could imagine a later Browning writing “Peregrine,”
but cannot imagine anyone but Elinor Wylie
writing “Lucifer.” Much stress has been laid on
Mrs. Wylie’s gift for bright, strange images in her
poetry, and this is no small item in her genius; but
the steeled emotion, the unearthly cry that is heard
under the burnished and metallic surfaces, sometimes
in not instantly intelligible words, is her voice
as a poet. In “Now That Your Eyes Are Shut,”
which I quote, there is one stanza that might have
been written by a poet of a long-past century—I
leave you to name him—but there are two stanzas,
the most important, which I can imagine no one but
Elinor Wylie writing:
Now that your eyes are shut
Not even a dusty butterfly may brush them;
My flickering knife has cut
Life from sonorous lion throats to hush them.
If pigeons croon too loud
Or lambs bleat proudly, they must come to slaughter,
And I command each cloud
To be precise in spilling silent water.
Let light forbear those lids:
I have forbidden the feathery ash to smutch them;
The spider thread that thrids
The gray-plumed grass has not my leave to touch them.
My casual ghost may slip,
Issuing tiptoe, from the pure inhuman;
The tissues of my lip
Will bruise your eyelids, while I am a woman.
ii
The title poem in Amanda Hall’s book, The
Dancer in the Shrine, tempts to quotation, but there
seems to me something unfair in reprinting it complete
and to cut lines from it is to mutilate both
what is taken and that which is left. There is a
good deal of the life of the countryside in the book;
Miss Hall’s New England is that of Thoreau but
her lyrical gift is distinctly personal. A characteristic
mood and treatment is shown in “I’ll Build My
House of Sticks and Stones,” from which the following
couplets are taken:
I’ll build my house of sticks and stones,
Of lollypops and herring bones,
None other than myself to please—
Of fine, fresh straw or green sage cheese;
I’ll build my house of this and that
To suit my pleasure and my cat—
I’ll clothe myself in cast-off rags,
In cobwebs or in barley bags,
The shabbier I am encased
The fruitier my joy will taste.
I’ll set my two lips to the air
And carol to the birds’ despair....
Some musing morning as I sing
Perhaps I’ll catch God listening,
In soft enchantment at His sill.
He’ll tell His angels to be still,
He’ll say to them in tones discreet
That there is singing in the street...
The pagan quality keeps its joyousness while transmuting
it into something reverent and beautiful in
such lines as “The Dancer in the Shrine.” The
religious note, differently accented, may be found
in the work of Alice Meynell, whose complete verse
is now available in The Poems of Alice Meynell.
Mrs. Meynell’s death has brought a sharp emphasis
upon the rare character of her poetic gift.
Alfred Noyes says she has left to the world a
volume “containing only masterpieces,” but I like
better the words of J. L. Garvin: “Not one of her
poems but was the music of a thought as most of
her essays were the fruit of perception.” Let me not
quote “The Shepherdess,” so widely known and so
self-expressive, but “Chimes” with its changing
image and its “music of a thought” sung to
perfection:
Brief, on a flying night,
From the shaken tower,
A flock of bells take flight,
And go with the hour.
Like birds from the cote to the gales,
Abrupt—O hark!
A fleet of bells set sails,
And go to the dark.
Sudden the cold airs swing.
Alone, aloud,
A verse of bells takes wing
And flies with the cloud.
Mrs. Meynell was one of a group of contemporary
Catholic poets of whom, it may be, Aline Kilmer
is the most widely known and read in America. Of
the others of that group I should like especially to
mention two whose new books of verse have just
appeared—Sister M. Madeleva, a nun in the congregation
of the Holy Cross at Holy Rosary Academy,
California, and Wilfred Rowland Childe, who
is English. Sister M. Madeleva’s collection called
Knights Errant contains verse highly spiritual in
type, clear and strong in emotional expression, and
admirable for the manner in which the author has
adhered to subjects and thoughts strictly within the
limits of her clearly defined experience. Mysticism
is natural to these Catholic singers, and will be
found strongly in Mr. Childe’s The Gothic Rose, a
book of poems quite Gothic in spirit, sometimes
wistful, sometimes marked with melancholy and
obviously the outgrowth of a loving adoration.
Although such poems as “The Dirge for Westminster”
and “The Virgin of Flanders” are the body
of The Gothic Rose, there is a range including an
Oxford poem (“Idylle Oxonienne”), one or two
classical subjects, such as “Daphne,” and the modern
verse of “The Austrian River.”
Like Amanda Hall, Josephine Daskam Bacon is
both novelist and poet, but it is as a poet that Mrs.
Bacon will arrest our attention for her Truth o’
Women, which has been described as a Spoon River
Anthology for women. The book consists of a
group of “Epitaphs for Women” in free verse; this
one being characteristic:
I was sorry to leave you,
Because I knew you needed me.
But are there no women who are sorry to die
Because they need their husbands?
I wanted, dying, to be one of them!
Forty of these “Epitaphs” are followed by a series
of dramatic monologues under the general title,
“Truth o’ Women.” The monologues are spoken
by the mother of Joan of Arc, Lincoln’s mother,
Dante’s wife, Milton’s daughters, the wife of Judas,
one of Bluebeard’s wives, the mother of Mary and
Martha and the wives of Columbus, Sir Isaac Newton,
Cadmus, Adam, Shakespeare, Socrates, Pilate
and Julius Cæsar.
No, evidently realism in poetry is not through!
Look, here is “an epic of insignificance” called The
Life and Death of Mrs. Tidmuss, by Wilfrid Blair.
Pursuing the Spoon River comparison for Mrs.
Bacon’s book, one is on the verge of calling Blair’s
work a Main Street of England in verse. In subject
matter it is more like John Masefield’s Widow
in the Bye Street, I should say. We start with
Selina as the young daughter of a greengrocer, see
her as a slow and bashful girl leading a drab existence
and wooed finally by Tom Tidmuss, who is
interested in poultry-raising. He is a printer by
trade. They plan to marry and get a cottage.
Then, for the first time, Selina lives:
She had a ring, and roses in her cheek.
A year’s wait reaps the reward of her wedding day.
She had no wedding bells. Her well-oiled sire
Led her in tribal veilings up the aisle
To where a curate, impatient for his hire,
Hovered, and Tom in his stiff Sunday style.
Things went through quick. It mattered not. She moved
In a mazed phantasmagoria all the while.
Thereafter births, deaths, a subdued drudgery, old
age, the selling of the house and furniture and the
going to live with her daughter, where she is not
very happy. The poet concludes on a swift
crescendo, maestoso:
Death sets free: it is Life that holds in thrall ...
Blow up, O trumpets of eternity!
Shout, souls of God, from starry sea to sea!
Stars, clash your shining shields—a soul is free!
iii
Of George Santayana as a poet I have incidentally
spoken in Chapter 9, quoting one of his superb
sonnets, but I think I neglected to call attention
to the preface he has recently provided for his
Poems. It is an omission that must be repaired. I
can scarcely give an idea of the preface’s excellence
as vigorous and beautiful prose, but aside from
Santayana’s explanation that the subject of these
poems is “simply my philosophy in the making,”
it is just to quote this passage: “A Muse—not exactly
an English Muse—actually visited me in my
isolation; the same, or a ghost of the same, that
visited Boethius or Alfred de Musset or Leopardi.
It was literally impossible for me then not to re-echo
her eloquence. When that compulsion ceased,
I ceased to write verses. My emotion—for there
was genuine emotion—faded into a sense that my
lesson was learned and my troth plighted....” I
cannot resist quoting from the closing poem, the
lines on Art that count as a translation from
Theophile Gautier but are actually so much more
than that:
All things are doubly fair
If patience fashion them
And care—
Verse, enamel, marble, gem....
—All things return to dust
Save beauties fashioned well.
The bust
Outlasts the citadel.
The gods, too, die, alas!
But deathless and more strong
Than brass
Remains the sovereign song.
How W. E. Henley would have loved this!
(But perhaps he saw it, and was not silent).
Henley, whose Poems in my copy are the nineteenth
edition—and my copy is far from new. Henley
and Francis Thompson and Kipling go on; few of
us need any urge or even any reminder to re-read
them; their poetry gains its fresh recruits with every
season of the young men, and old men have been
known to resume their youth over the pages....
Youth! That is the cargo that sails on those
perilous seas forlorn we looked upon from John
Keats’s casements opening on the foam. What a
frank title for a first book of verse is Robert Roe’s
Here You Have Me! The title poem and a few
others in the Whitmanesque tradition are followed
by a group of poems derived from experiences as a
sailor, verses that break free of any tradition known
to me; and by poems ripened out of an intimate
contact with the Arizona desert. I have liked some
of these greatly, just as I like, for another reason,
Vachel Lindsay’s Going-to-the-Sun, which is suitably
fantastic. Some way must be devised for
everyone to hear Lindsay recite or chant his verses,
since in no other way can the reader possibly get
more than half their effect. I think if all could
hear him in a half dozen, the awakened instinct and
quickened imagination in most of us would accomplish
the rest. We should then be able merely to
read him and feel the elixir.
In a later chapter of this book devoted to Christopher
Morley there is mention of his poem,
“Parson’s Pleasure,” which gives title to his new
and by all odds best collection of verse. The remarkable
change and growth in Morley as a prose
writer has been attended by chemistries in the poet,
and I expect the large popularity gained by his
poems in Chimneysmoke will accrue without delay to
the poems in Parson’s Pleasure. But are you
familiar with the poetry of Franklin P. Adams? I
only partly mean the F. P. A. of the daily breakfast
table and occasional short lyric or bit of versification
heading a newspaper column. I mean the
author of Tobogganing on Parnassus, and Weights
and Measures, and Overset, and So There! Light,
satiric verse, most of it; but how finished and
perfect in its form, how penetrating in its arrowy
indirection! Whether he is penning the address
of the passionate advertiser to his love or doing for
Horace what Edward Fitzgerald did for a certain
Persian singer, Mr. Adams is constantly curing the
evils of civilisation, freeing those “baffled whims”
Don Marquis tells about and generally making life
more livable by making it more singable.
iv
Among studies of contemporary poets we have
had none so valuable, I think, as Lloyd Morris’s
The Poetry of Edwin Arlington Robinson. The
first and most important inspiration that came to
Mr. Morris was undoubtedly the divisions of his
subject, so that he brings us to the consideration of
a difficult master under the headings natural to the
poet, his “Men,” his use of “History,” and
“Legend,” his two prose “Plays,” and as the crown,
his “Ideas” or intellectual content. It is hard to
see how any reader of poetry can do without this
lucid discussion and exposition of one who may
well be, and is by competent critics adjudged to be,
the greatest living American poet. A biographical
note, following the careful bibliography of Mr.
Robinson’s works by W. Van R. Whitall, rounds
out the usefulness of the little volume.
The popularity of anthologies of verse is now
proverbial, and I expect that there will be plenty of
attention for the Anthology of American Verse
which J. C. Squire, poet and editor of the London
Mercury, has completed. The work shows the advantages
gained by the onlooker’s standpoint, who
can bring to bear a sense of perspective better than
our own. The selection also shows Mr. Squire’s
fine taste which, so far as I know, has no superior
and very few equals among those whose knowledge
of poetry would qualify them to be anthologists at
all. Another collection of extreme importance but
necessarily from a different angle has been completed
by Margery Gordon and Marie B. King, and
just published under the title Verse of Our Day.
As the compilers had distinctly in mind school use
of this book in a special edition, as well as the wide
popular audience in an edition from which certain
textbook features would be omitted, their aim was
for inclusiveness and a highly representative quality
above all else—though a rigid selection was inevitable,
too. The result is a book presenting 347
poems, 225 by American poets and 122 by British.
Ninety-two of the Americans and 42 of the British
poets are modern—that is, they lie between Eugene
Field and Amy Lowell on the one hand, between
W. E. Henley and Alfred Noyes and John Masefield
on the other. Biographies of the poets, reading
lists and, in the school edition, certain guides to
study have been included. The popularity of
Verse of Our Day ought to be sure and of some
permanence.
Henry van Dyke, assisted by Hardin Craig and
Asa Don Dickinson, has edited A Book of British
and American Verse rather from a standpoint like
J. C. Squire’s. “This is not an attempt to make
another historical anthology of English verse,” Dr.
van Dyke explains. “I have looked only at the
value and beauty of the poems themselves.” If
some poets were unrepresented, it was not to be
helped. “Those that seemed the best have been
chosen out of many, not to illustrate a theory, but
for their own sake, because they are good to read.”
And for those who loved Roosevelt as well as for
those who have the anthologist’s interest, there is
Roosevelt as the Poets Saw Him, edited by Charles
Hanson Towne and containing poems by Kipling,
Edith Wharton, Richard Le Gallienne, William
Watson, Edgar Lee Masters, Owen Wister, John
Hay, Vachel Lindsay, Edwin Arlington Robinson
and Robert Bridges.
v
Leaving aside all disputes on the score of the
drama, one of the best moments of our contemporary
literature came a few years ago when it was
first known that J. M. Barrie had consented to the
publication of his plays. And then when the published
plays began to come along, the moment enlarged
itself. Here was a man who was practically
inventing something, a curious but felicitous compound
of novel and drama, a mixture of narrative
and dialogue, something that extended far beyond
the irrepressible wit and satire of G. Bernard Shaw’s
stage directions, priceless as those had been. There
was a feeling, with good reason, that by this step
Barrie had done more to instate himself with posterity
than by anything heretofore. For about the
plays themselves, as plays, the controversy is already
active; but about the success of the plays as
published I know of no dispute or objection. Dear
Brutus is the eighth volume in a series which already
included A Kiss for Cinderella, Alice Sit-by-the
Fire, What Every Woman Knows, Quality
Street, The Admirable Crichton and two collections
of the shorter plays, Half Hours (“Pantaloon,”
“The Twelve-Pound Look,” “Rosalind,” “The
Will”) and Echoes of the War (“The Old Lady
Shows Her Medals,” “The New Word,” “Barbara’s
Wedding,” “A Well-Remembered Voice”). There
are good things to come yet, including Peter Pan,
and these are in preparation; but much of the best
Barrie and best-agreed-to Barrie is now ready to
go on the bookshelf (where it won’t stay put very
well)—and the best of Barrie is good in any company.
For example, The Admirable Crichton,
which even the most critical have found strong
words to praise. The printed version avoids the
fault of the 1918 stage revival in which, as has
been said, Barrie dulled or allowed some one else
to dull the edge of his perfect satire. For a short
and appreciative yet discriminating account of
Barrie the playwright, one could not do better than
read the chapter upon him in John W. Cunliffe’s
English Literature During the Last Half Century
(Macmillan: Revised Edition, 1923).
John Galsworthy, the subject of the first chapter
of this book, will not, of course, be overlooked by
anyone concerned in knowing the best plays of our
time. His plays are to be had, complete at present,
in five volumes (Plays: First Series; Plays: Second
Series, etc.) and a supplementary volume, Six Short
Plays. Or, with the exception of the six short
plays, each may be had separately. Probably a
consensus would select Loyalties, Justice, Strife,
The Silver Box, The Pigeon and The Skin Game as
his most important and representative dramas.
Arnold Bennett’s new play, Don Juan de
Marana, represents one fulfilment of a threefold
ambition. Don Juan, together with the legend of
the Wandering Jew and the story of Tannhäuser,
had attracted him for years as great subjects for
drama. A good deal of preliminary work on the
Wandering Jew theme was wasted by news that
somebody else had written a play on the theme and
obtained a production. “I put the Wandering Jew
aside for ten years,” explains Bennett. “With regard
to Tannhäuser, I am still wondering how to
cure Elizabeth of her insipidity, and how to get into
the heads of a twentieth century audience the surely
obvious fact that music is not an essential ingredient
of the tale.” Don Juan Tenorio proved impossible
as the basis of a play, but finally Bennett came upon
the other, later version of the Don Juan story.
“And then I discovered what I wanted in a work on
my own shelves, the plays of Dumas père in twenty-five
volumes. I ought to have divined that since
Dumas wrote plays on everything, he must have
written a play on the Don Juan de Marana variation
of the Don Juan legend.”
At last all of W. Somerset Maugham’s plays are
available for the reader, some ten volumes that include
not only The Circle, but Lady Frederick, The
Explorer, Jack Straw, etc. It should perhaps be
noted here that the play Rain is not a Maugham
play, but an adaptation of Maugham’s tremendous
short story, “Rain,” included in his book of South
Sea tales, The Trembling of a Leaf.
John Dos Passos in his Rosinante to the Road
Again, in the chapter on “Benavente’s Madrid,” has
conveyed with clearness and much picturesqueness
the style and point, the character and perfection of
taste in a certain style (lo castizo) with which
Jacinto Benavente’s dramas abound. It is this that
from their Spanish viewpoint makes them of such
distinction; but that would hardly account for their
success outside Spain. Larger qualities—a gentle
and deadly satire, a nervous vitality, wit—do that;
and the visit of Señor Benavente to America a few
months ago did much to attract attention to his
work. Twelve of his plays, assembled in three
volumes in the translations of John Garrett Underhill,
are now accessible to the English reader.
Benavente represents a more modern Spain than
the Echegaray with whose drame passionel those
who read plays are sufficiently familiar. He should
be read for his own sake and as a Continental
dramatist much more distinctly representative of
something national, something Spanish in sensibility,
than are the outstanding playwrights of
other European lands—excepting Russia, no doubt.
One can scarcely read Ibsen for Norway, or
Strindberg for a little corner of the world; Tchekov
is Russia but Andreiev is humanity. Jacinto
Benavente, however, is Spain without the sacrifice
of those elements which are of importance to a
society in any country.
The impressive success of the Theatre Guild is
known everywhere, and the Theatre Guild Library
is very welcome for its addition of several of the
finest of recent plays to the resources of the reading
table. The series has been auspiciously begun with
publication of Karel Capek’s R. U. R., Ernest
Toller’s The Mass-Men, and Elmer L. Rice’s The
Adding Machine. A particularly good pick of recent
successes will be found in Contemporary
American Plays, edited by Arthur H. Quinn and
containing Jesse Lynch Williams’s “Why Marry?”
Eugene O’Neill’s “The Emperor Jones,” Rachel
Crothers’s “Nice People,” Gilbert Emery’s “The
Hero,” and George S. Kaufman’s and Marc Connelly’s
“To the Ladies!”
Of recent books on the drama, Stark Young’s
The Flower in Drama: Papers on the Theatre, has
attracted wide attention and much deserved praise.
Not much more than a year ago Mr. Young, previously
a professor of English, began to write his
papers on plays, actors, and the theatre in general
in the New Republic. His articles and reviews
attracted at once the attention of discriminating
people interested in the theatre; their admiration
was quickly developed by an attitude which showed
a comprehending sympathy for what the younger
men were trying to do and yet never lost sight of
the drama as a developed art with certain inviolable
principles. Moreover, he wrote with wit, precision
and charm. There is no better reading of its sort,
I think, than his “Dear Mr. Chaplin,” his “Circus,”
or his “Letter to Duse,” all contained in this volume.
Perhaps a note should explain the title, which
is based on a sentence: “If one aims only at the
beautiful, the flower is sure to appear”—a phrase
drawn from Seami, 1363-1444, who, with his
father, stood at the head of the No of Japan.
18. Lost Patterns
COLLESTAMORE was showing me his library,
but a summons to the telephone had drawn him
from the room and I was standing before the set of
shelves between the cases containing rarities and
those which held fine bindings, frankly puzzled.
There were not many books ranged here and I
could not make out the distinction that grouped them
together. It might have been no distinction but
mere accident in the case of anyone less methodical
than Collestamore. With him, no; some thought
or queer intention must underlie the choosing.
Fiction and non-fiction, new books and some old
ones, some volumes of attractive format and design
and others whose homely plainness was possibly
compensated by the fact of their being first editions—it
meant nothing. Alphabetical arrangement by
authors hadn’t been attempted and was, indeed,
scarcely worth while until the little assembly grew
larger. Then he returned and met my look of
inquiry with:
“You’ve discovered my Lost Patterns.”
“Lost Patterns?”
“Oh,” he said, “there aren’t many of them, as
yet. The fact is, I only thought of it a week ago.
It rained all afternoon, so I spent a couple of hours
amusing myself with them—with a beginning of
them.”
“‘Lost’? But some of them are new enough.”
“It’s the only name I could think of that I rather
liked,” was his explanation. “A Lost Pattern—the
idea I was trying to express—may be either
old or new. It has nothing to do with the edition
or the binding, but everything to do with the contents
of a book. Novel or essay or biography, the
text ought to represent something we have not had
before or since and aren’t likely to have again;
something individual in the scheme or the style;
something wholly personal in the flavour—in short,
unique, I suppose. What James Huneker would
have called a unicorn. By the way, he is a Lost
Pattern, probably.”
“Probably.” I was not unsympathetic to his
idea. “You are anxious to get together a collection
for the collection’s sake, I take it.”
“No, for the reader’s sake. It wouldn’t have any
value as a collection, other than the curious, and I
swear it could have no value for the person of
literary practices.” I glanced at him but could
detect nothing in his expression. I have always
suspected Collestamore of secret literary practices,
concealed efforts to put his freakish self into words.
My idea is that he attempts essays and that so far
he is like a fellow fond of cigarettes and learning to
roll his own. He went on, more meditatively: “A
fellow desiring to be a writer would waste his time
if he aped these people.” All the same, I thought,
I will bet that you——
“I began with a few new books,” he was saying.
“New or comparatively so. The thing that started
me, I guess, was Elinor Wylie’s novel.” He fingered
his copy of Jennifer Lorn.
“I haven’t read it.”
“She has made a replica of the eighteenth century
novel, a suitably fantastic story about an English
aristocrat and his bride who journey to the India of
the East India Company and meet with bizarre
adventures. It is what you would expect of a poet
enamoured with the life of that glittering period. I
wonder that Max Beerbohm hasn’t done it long
before this. Or Aldous Huxley.”
“I see you have them both represented here.”
“Yes, the thought of them sprang from Mrs.
Wylie’s book. I took down Huxley’s Crome Yellow
and his Mortal Coils. From Max I wanted
the books of his caricatures—Rossetti and His
Circle and that other one he calls A Survey. My
collection of Lost Patterns was begun, then and
there. The idea of what would constitute a Lost
Pattern was formed—I don’t say it didn’t enlarge
afterward nor that it won’t enlarge or change shape
again. But, essentially, I knew what I wanted.”
“Nobody knows what he wants,” I objected.
“The thing is obviously impossible. You mean you
knew that you wanted to add more books to the five
you had assembled.”
“Any way you like.” Collestamore’s indifference
was polite, but profound. “I began looking over
the other shelves. The next thing I came upon was
George Moore’s Hail and Farewell. We shall
never have a writer like George Moore, not even
George Moore.” I thought to myself: With that
nuance, with a phrase like that, he is deliberately
imitating Beerbohm’s prose; I had better take no
notice of it. His next remark startled me.
“Literary style, distinction, in the enterprise I
had embarked upon was of no consequence whatever.”
And seeing that this wasn’t brilliantly
intelligible, he continued:
“The thing was much deeper than that—the personal
twist or wrinkle was what I was after, the fly
in the amber. Not a perfectly preserved fly in the
amber of a choice literary expression but a wriggling
insect caught on the tanglefoot of unaccustomed
words would do as well.” He was fast throwing
grammar overboard in the effort to lighten ship and
bring his thoughts to port. “I have not, as yet,
come upon an illiterate author who deserves inclusion
among my Lost Patterns, but I shouldn’t
hesitate to put him in.”
“I see.” After a pause: “Here you’ve got
George Meredith. He’s very nearly illiterate, don’t
you think so? Sometimes literacy can go too far,
as in Meredith and in Henry James, whom you’ve
put alongside. Maurice Hewlett is another
matter.”
“Well,” said Collestamore, “I stuck them in as
a matter of course. Anybody would naturally have
thought of them in such a connection. The things
I really pride myself upon are my detections among
these single and mostly more recent books. You
take F. Scott Fitzgerald’s This Side of Paradise,
or William McFee’s Casuals of the Sea, or C. E.
Montague’s very fetching Fiery Particles, or Ernest
Bramah’s Kai Lung’s Golden Hours, or Don Marquis’s
Hermione, or Alfred B. Stanford’s The
Ground Swell”—he was half pulling them out and
letting them fall back, as he enumerated them—“and
tell me if I have not shown both enterprise
and catholicity.”
I thought he had, but I also thought he should
attempt some justificatory remarks, and said so.
His point in regard to This Side of Paradise was
its vitality in spite of its having, as Edmund Wilson,
Jr., observed, almost every conceivable fault.
“It had all imaginable faults, but yet, in Wilson’s
words, ‘it did not fail to live,’” Collestamore
argued. I nodded, and he went on. Casuals of
the Sea, it appeared, pleased him by a lack of anything
self-conscious in the writing. He much preferred
it to the too purposeful artistry of McFee’s
Command. The singularity of those tales in Fiery
Particles, he thought, called for no special pleading
in its behalf. The Ground Swell was a sea pattern
unique in its simplicity; Don Marquis’s heroine and
her little group of serious thinkers were the apotheosis
of the Great Inane. As for Kai Lung’s Golden
Hours, he was merely echoing G. K. Chesterton,
Belloc and a dozen others whose judgment was
respectable and might command my deference not
given to his own.
“Oh, I defer,” I assured him. “You are the Lord
High Executioner in this series of literary beheadings.
I consider that a reign of terror has begun.”
It wasn’t beheadings, he said. He wasn’t going
over the field of daisies like the Syracusan tyrant
and with his sceptre, cane, stick or staff cropping off
the heads of the taller blooms.
“Daisies? I thought it was a field of corn.”
As to that, he didn’t remember. It was no matter,
anyway. He was not demolishing, but singling
out for eminence. No whistling cane, but——
“The sceptre gently touching one here, one there,
knighting him, commanding him to spring up——”
“You will observe,” in a tone of patient tolerance,
“the surprising variety one gets in the shortest possible
space of time at this sort of thing. Of course
I thought of Jane Austen, and rather than put in
Pride and Prejudice I chose The Watsons as completed
by Miss Oulton. After all, The Watsons is
later work than either Pride and Prejudice or Sense
and Sensibility and the conjecture as to why it was
never finished gives it special interest. By that
time I was running over my books more or less as
they stand on the shelves, alphabetised by authors.
The next thing, therefore, was Arnold Bennett, and
I chose The Truth About an Author. You know, it
is the one book of Bennett’s that could not, imaginably,
have been written by anybody else. H. C.
Bunner was next. I really don’t know whether
anyone living besides myself and Franklin P. Adams
now cares for Bunner; if not, so much the better!”
“I see. The more lost the Lost Pattern, the more
to be prized.”
“Why not? His Stories and his Short Sixes are
as American as, perhaps more so than, O. Henry.”
He was quietly dogmatic.
“Is O. Henry here?” I looked. “Yes, to be
sure. Also portions of Kipling and, I judge,
Frank R. Stockton practically complete. But these
were among the matter-of-courses. Let’s see:
Shouldn’t you put in Frank Norris? The Pit, I
suppose. And there’s W. W. Jacobs.”
He looked so restive that I stopped. “It’s really
no way to go at the thing wholesale,” he protested.
“I haven’t made up my mind as to which one or
two books of Stockton’s yet; he’s there in bulk only
temporarily. I suppose it had better be Rudder
Grange.”
“Make it Salthaven from W. W. Jacobs,” I
urged. “Unless you strongly prefer At Sunwich
Port.”
“I do. Probably it’s just that I read it first.
After Bunner I ran against George W. Cable’s The
Grandissimes. Then I laid hold of Stephen Crane’s
The Red Badge of Courage. Then John Dos
Passos’s Rosinante to the Road Again.”
“Thomas Beer has just finished a biography of
Stephen Crane. Joseph Conrad has written a preface
for it,” I said, but Collestamore paid no attention.
He was across the room, picking something
out, and came back in a moment holding up Edmund
Gosse’s Three French Moralists. “Just
thought of Gosse. This will do to hold the place
for him until I decide. Have you never read it?
Then you don’t know Rochefoucauld or La Bruyere
as you should know them. And you’ve missed a
singularly urbane and exquisite example of English
prose style.”
“You have both Compton Mackenzie’s Carnival
and his Sinister Street in here. Make it Carnival.
Let’s see: David Graham Phillips’s Susan Lennox:
Her Fall and Rise; John Ames Mitchell’s Amos
Judd; and that new illustrated edition of DavidHarum. I guess I’d agree with your choice of each of
those.” His expression remained polite but I could
see it would make not the least difference whether I
agreed or not. “Did you see Rodolph Valentino in
‘The Young Rajah’?” I asked, to tease him. He
was good-natured about it. “I did. I have no objection
to Valentino, but I much prefer the story as
told in Amos Judd.” He was ruffling the pages of
David Harum. “I like these text drawings, don’t
you?” I said I did, adding that David Harum was
the kind of book that cried for illustration.
“About biography, or especially, autobiography,”
he said suddenly. “Should you say Booker T.
Washington’s Up From Slavery, for one? There’ll
never be another of that pattern.” But I had a suggestion
for him there. “Anyway, you must include
Bouck White’s The Book of Daniel Drew.” He
said at once, “Oh, yes!”—adding, “Autobiographical
in form, anyway. White always contended that
he found an actual record left by Uncle Dan’l
Drew. Semi-fictional, if you like; but a grand piece
of satire. And now I rather think we’re wanted to
sit down to lunch. Er—how about a swallow of
something first? Or is that among your lost
appetites?”
19. Joseph C. Lincoln Discovers Cape Cod
i
ON 13 February, 1870, in the town of Brewster,
Massachusetts, which is on Cape Cod, there
was born to Joseph Lincoln and Emily (Crosby)
Lincoln a son whom they named Joseph Crosby
Lincoln. The child’s father was a seaman, so had
been his father’s father and his father’s father’s
father; and so were all his uncles. His mother’s
people followed the sea. For a mile in each direction
from the plain little house of the Lincolns every
house contained a Cap’n. When the boy was a year
old, his father died of a fever in Charleston, South
Carolina. Emily Crosby Lincoln had made voyages
with her husband, whose death made it necessary
to move up toward Boston. In summers, however,
the boy got back to the Cape with its sand dunes and
cranberry bogs, its chance to fish and swim. “He
rode the old stage coach from Harwick to Chatham;
he knew the lightkeepers, the fishermen, the life
savers, and the cracker-box oracles in the village
stores. The perfume of the green salt meadows,
the pungent pines and bayberries ... the fishing
boats, the dripping nets, ‘the mighty surge and
thunder of the surf along the shores’ were part of his
very existence.” The description is reminiscent
of Walt Whitman’s account of his young manhood.
“I suppose if I had been born a few years earlier,
I would have had my own ship,” Joseph C. Lincoln
says. But the day of steam had begun. He went
to school at Brewster and Chelsea. As he grew up,
college was seen to be out of the question. The
youth and his mother went to Brooklyn and he
entered a broker’s office. This work he hated. “I
have always felt that they were fully as glad to
get rid of me as I was to leave them.” Wishing
to draw, he fell under the guidance of Henry Sandham
(“Hy”) and went to Boston where, with
another fellow, an office was opened for commercial
work. To make a picture sell better, Lincoln sometimes
wrote a verse or joke to go with it. Sometimes
the verse or joke sold when the drawing did not.
It was the day of universal bicycling. The League
of American Wheelmen Bulletin had a circulation
of over 125,000 and Sterling Elliott, its editor,
offered Lincoln a job as associate editor. His verses
were thus brought to the attention of a considerable
public. He married in 1897 Florence E.
Sargent, of Chelsea, Massachusetts, and he was
writing verse, mostly in the vernacular of Cape Cod,
for a number of publications. In 1899 the passion
for bicycling began to wane and Lincoln definitely
moved from Boston to New York to try to make a
living as a writer on his own. He had written a
first short story, a Cape Cod narrative, and sold it to
Saturday Evening Post. That magazine, Harper’s
Weekly, The Youth’s Companion and Puck were
taking his verse, which was sometimes in a swinging
metre and sometimes humour tinctured with philosophy.
In 1902 Albert Brandt, of Trenton, New
Jersey, published Lincoln’s Cape Cod Ballads, in a
yellow-backed volume with illustrations by E. W.
Kemble. It was Lincoln’s first book. Now he was
writing short stories in earnest and with some success
and he began a novel which could only be
written by labouring at it on a corner of the dining
room table from midnight on Saturdays through
Sunday mornings until the manuscript was completed.
It was the story of three old sea captains
who, despairing of their joint efforts at housekeeping,
advertised for a wife. Published in 1904 as
Cap’n Eri, this affair settled two large doubts in
Lincoln’s mind; first, that he could sustain the interest
of readers through a long story; second, that
he could make a living by writing, and by writing
books.
JOSEPH C. LINCOLN
ii
Many have been the editions of Cap’n Eri since
its appearance, nineteen years ago. The outline of
those nineteen years in Joseph C. Lincoln’s life is
only pleasantly eventful. A friendship with Sewell
Ford led him to become a resident of Hackensack,
New Jersey. There he has built a house of
“Colonial” lines, the sight of which is not good for
less successful writers. A very handsome summer
home stands on a terrace at Chatham, Cape Cod.
In 1912 the Lincolns lived for a while in England
and travelled to some extent on the Continent, visiting
Switzerland. Frequently Mr. Lincoln has gone
to one or another part of the United States, even
unto California, to deliver, before crowded houses,
his lecture on “Cape Cod Folks” or to give readings
from his own books. And every year since 1904
has seen the publication of one, sometimes two,
Lincoln novels.
In Hackensack Mr. Lincoln attends the Unitarian
Church—he is a member of its Board of Trustees—and
he was at one time a member of the Hackensack
Board of Education. He used to belong to the
Salmagundi Club in New York but resigned because
he used the club and its privileges so little. He
still belongs to The Players in New York; but in
any ordinary sense of the word he is not a clubman.
The family usually goes to Cape Cod in a motor
car and while there Mr. Lincoln fishes and swims
and sails all he can. In Hackensack golf is his
principal diversion and he tries to play daily,
“although there are times, particularly in my brand
of golf, when there seems to be more hard work and
moral strain than amusement, by a good deal.” The
man is a red-cheeked, rotund and comfortable man,
with a bright eye and a catching smile and a great
fund of stories such as the following:
“An old salt of my acquaintance spent a recent
winter in Florida and found in the fishing of the
region a fascinating but pretty strenuous pastime.
As a skipper of the old school he scorned modern
devices for fishing, such as reels. In fact he went
out to fish tarpons in good Cape Cod fashion
with merely a fishing line and his own bare hands.
He hooked a tarpon and for a couple of hours there
was waged a terrific battle between the fish and the
stubborn old Cape Codder, whose hands were torn
and blistered. Proudly he exhibited his 79-pound
catch to the natives. ‘Not much of a haul,’ was
their comment. ‘Why, a little woman, no size at
all, just brought in a tarpon that tipped the scales
at 100 pounds.’ Would he like to see a real fish?
‘Thunder, no!’ roared the Cap’n. ‘Show me the
woman!’”
iii
Hamlin Garland, the author of some accounts
of American life which have not omitted the sombre,
the discouraging, the bitter scenes and places, has
written:
“Joseph Lincoln is not only a novelist of wide
reputation, he is a public benefactor. His success
has in it something heartening and corrective. In
the midst of work which appeals to the base and
cynical in human life (American city life) his
clean, wholesome, humorous stories of Cape Cod
sea captains and their neighbours give evidence of
the fact that there is a huge public for decent and
homely fiction, just as the success of his play,
‘Shavings,’ is evidence that there is a paying audience
for a decent and homely drama. His books
can be read aloud in the family circle with joy to
all the members of it—I know, for I have myself
read eight or ten of them to my wife and daughters.
They make no pretense of being profound, or new,
or ‘smart.’ They are filled with the characters and
the humour which are native to the Cape. Lincoln
knows these Cape towns and their inhabitants as
Irving Bacheller knows his men of the North
Woods, for he was raised among them and lives in
their neighbourhood several months of each year.
He looks like one of them, like an old skipper,
hearty, unassuming and kindly. The task which he
has set himself is one which calls for a keen sense
of character, democracy of sentiment and a fancy
which never—or very seldom—loses its hold on
the solid ground of experience. His plots are sometimes
negligible, but his characters, even when they
seem a bit repetitious, are a joy. His prosperity is
well earned.”
This undoubtedly expresses a general sentiment,
although it does not express it so vividly as a sentence
that appeared in the Los Angeles Express:
“One enjoys a Joe Lincoln novel as one does a
long, cool, thirst-quenching drink on a hot day.”
However, before examining the novels themselves,
it is proper to put down here some things
that Mr. Lincoln has said, at one time or another,
showing his attitude toward them. Of course his
attitude toward other kinds of fiction is a part of his
general attitude, and so:
“I read all sorts of books and at all times. I
don’t know that I can name any particular author
who may be called my favourite. I am very fond
of Stevenson, for instance—but then, so I am of
Kipling, except his more recent stories, which have
a bit too much British Empire in them to please
me,—of Mark Twain, of W. J. Locke, and many
others. I think I like a story for the story’s sake.
I like to like my characters or dislike them in the
old-fashioned way. It is for this reason perhaps
that the work of such writers as Arnold Bennett,
William De Morgan, Joseph Conrad, and others, of
the realistic school, so-called, does not appeal to
me as much as—well, as Mr. Locke’s work, for instance.
I realise,—no one can help realising—the
fine literary craftsmanship in a book like Lord Jim.
It is a wonderful piece of character mosaic, and yet
in reading it I am always conscious of the literary
work. I say to myself, ‘This is marvellous; see how
the writer is picking his hero to pieces, thought by
thought, motive by motive.’ And being so conscious
of the writer, I do not lose myself in the story.
This is not offered as a criticism; certainly I should
not presume to criticise Mr. Bennett or Mr. Conrad.
It is more of a confession of something lacking on
my part. I enjoy reading Lord Jim, or The Old
Wives’ Tale, but I do not return to them again and
again as I do to The Beloved Vagabond or The
Morals of Marcus Ordeyne. Perhaps this is, as
some of my realistically inclined friends tell me, a
childish love for romance on my part. Well, perhaps
it is. If it is, I can’t help it; as I said, this
statement is not offered as an excuse, but a
confession.
“This sort of thing shows in my own stories. It
would be very hard for me to write a long story
which should end dismally. It is only too true that
stories in real life frequently end that way, but I
don’t like my yarns to do so. So it is fair to presume
that in whatever books I may hereafter write,
the hero and the heroine will be united, virtue rewarded
and vice punished, as has happened in those
for which I am already responsible. Perhaps this
same weakness for a story, a cheerful story, makes
me care little for the so-called problem novel. It
doesn’t mean that I am not fond of novels dealing
with certain kinds of problems. Winston Churchill’s
The Inside of the Cup I liked immensely; but the sex
problem, the divorce question, and all that sort of
thing does not appeal to me. A morbid lot of disagreeable
people, married or otherwise, moping and
quarrelling through a long story seem to me scarcely
worth while. To a specialist in nervous diseases
such a study might be interesting, but I really doubt
if the average healthy man or woman finds it so.
Certainly we should not care to associate with such
people were they living near us. We should get
away from them if we could.
“Perhaps I could write a story with gloomy situations
and an unhappy ending, but I wouldn’t like to
try it. I would much rather try to make people
cheerful and keep myself cheerful at the same time.
There’s enough sorrow in this world without finding
it in books.”
So he spoke ten years ago; so, with possibly the
change of an illustration or two, would he speak
today. From nine in the morning until noon or
one o’clock he disappears into his workshop, frequently
a place known only to himself, and either
writes (with a soft, stubby pencil, on large sheets
of yellow paper) or thinks about characters and the
very attenuated skeleton which, for Mr. Lincoln,
constitutes the “plot.”
“I know there are people who can turn out a short
story in two or three hours and it will be good
enough to sell, but I cannot help feeling that it
would have been much better if the writer had
devoted more time to it. In my case, doing work
that is satisfactory to me in any degree means that
I must fairly sweat it out, if I may use the expression.”
There usually comes a time when he gets
“a letter about once a week asking how the thing
is coming along. That has been a frequent experience,
especially when there are a lot of characters
in my story, and I’m having more or less trouble
with them. The story keeps stretching itself out.
I think I may have to adopt Mark Twain’s method,
and begin throwing my people down the well.”
There is a genial artifice about nearly all his tales.
Some years ago an interviewer for the Boston Globe
touched on the subject of “specialty” writing, which
was a natural topic, as all of Mr. Lincoln’s fiction
is a highly specialised affair, not only in its general
localisation on Cape Cod but in its characterisation
and homely wit and humour. The author said:
“A man writes what he knows. If he tries anything
else it must fall—show hollow. And I find
that it is necessary to write to your audience—that
one must consider that a large number of his readers
are to be women, and he must write things that will
appeal to the women of today.”
“You don’t mean that you would consider the
women to the point of writing stuff that would be
saleable, and refrain from writing stuff which appealed
to you, but might not be saleable?”
“Well,” said Mr. Lincoln, slowly, “I haven’t any
‘message’ that I know of. I’m not much of a high-brow.
I have standards, though. And if I am to
do the thing I want to do, I must get my book
printed. But I’ve never been satisfied—although I
did like The Postmaster pretty well.”
This was ten years ago, and Mr. Lincoln has
gone on, unchanging. He has the most enviable
record of any living American writer. No book of
his has been a failure. Some have done better than
others, but with no serious qualification of the statement
it can be said that each book has added to his
audience, so that he has for some years been an
unfailing best seller. Perhaps there has been a
noticeable increase in his popularity with and since
The Portygee (1919), which was published serially
and then surprised the publishers by beating Lincoln
records as a book. Or the gain may be traceable to
the preceding book, “Shavings,” and its successful
dramatisation. But in his sustained, unbroken and
increasing popularity as a fictionist Mr. Lincoln has
no competitor. There are others whose individual
books have sold more heavily, whose total sales may
be larger, but they have had lapses, and their popularity
has either been impaired or lost. Even as I
write the process known in the trade as “slipping”
is observable, here and there, in the case of one of
the most popular American authors, a person with
a long record of immediate successes, one of whose
work the American soldier, in 1917-18, could not
apparently get enough. Time does this thing, but
apparently it cannot touch, except to enhance, the
passion for the work of this native of Cape Cod,
who clips his words a little and sometimes says
“hev” and “hed” for “have” and “had”—about
whom there is even a suspicion of the Down East
nasal twanging as he talks. A wholly lovable personality.
He once wrote:
“Bless the children. They are the most convenient
excuses in creation. Probably, if it were
not for them, you wouldn’t get to the zoological
gardens or the aquarium or the fairy play oftener
than once a year or so. And as for the circus—but
that’s an old story.”
iv
We have not finished, though, with the man’s own
account of his relation to his work.
“You can’t use actual people. People aren’t as
dramatic in actual life as you want them to be. Of
course, you may hear a phrase, or a story—you may
talk with a person and get an impression and build
up your character from those things. But using
an actual person wouldn’t work. Besides, it would
be rather mean.
“In writing of a Cape Cod town or village,
although I purposely refrain from describing it as
any one town in particular, I have tried conscientiously
to give the characteristics of Cape Cod towns
I am acquainted with. The promontories and inlets
and hills and marshes in ‘my’ Cape Cod may not
be found where I have located them, but I have
tried very hard to make them like those which are
on the real Cape. And so with the Cape Codders
in my stories. I have never knowingly drawn the
exact, recognisable portrait of an individual. I
have of course, received hundreds of letters from
readers who inform me, in strict confidence, that
they know the original of ‘Cap’n ——’ and recognised
him at once. Nevertheless they are wrong.
I have endeavoured always to be true to type, and
in writing of the old deep-sea captain, the coasting
skipper, the longshoreman or the people of the Cape
villages, I have done my best to portray each as I
have seen and known specimens of his or her kind.
And in attempting to transcribe the habit of language
I have made it a rule never to use an expression
or idiom I have not heard used by a native of
the old colony.”
The differentiation of the various types of seaman
has been carefully made by Mr. Lincoln, and
is perhaps valuable to a full appreciation of his
fiction.
“The type of sea captain who figures in my
stories has not necessarily an accurately corresponding
type in my acquaintance. Going back to the
Cape after having lived in New York and Boston,
I was able to get varying angles on the lives of the
men and women I had known in my childhood.
The old sea captains that I remembered best as a
child were of more than one character, classified
according to their work. One was the dignified
old man who had travelled to some far-away corner
of the earth and returned prosperous, to spend the
rest of his days as an autocrat among his own people.
He had met strange peoples, he had been trusted
with a ship, and, as in the days I write of there were
no instantaneous means of talking across the oceans,
he was shrewd at bargaining and, being one of
the owners of the ship, he lost no chance to bring
home a cargo that would bring rich returns. In
other words, he was a shrewd trader as well as a
sailing master. The same dignified bearing that
he used in his trade followed him on land, and,
though jovial in manner, he was developed in
dignity and character.
“The other type of captain was more popular
with the youngsters. He may have been as shrewd,
and possibly made as much money, but he was filled
with a greater sense of humour, and took life as a
pastime. Men of this description would gather
round the stove and tell wonderful stories, though
all sea captains talk shop when they get together.
“Then too there were what are termed the ‘long-shore
captains.’ These were mostly engaged in
fishing, or in trading with coast towns and cities.
They were necessarily more limited in their views,
for they spent more time ashore, often working a
good-sized garden, fishing when the spirit moved,
and running a schooner to New York or Boston
if the chance came.
“Of all the sea-captains, however, those that I
knew best were those who were actually sailing in
the 1870’s and 1880’s, and who were largely engaged
in carrying oranges and lemons from Mediterranean
ports. These men were really the last of our sailing
captains. I have one friend in particular who was
in the fruit trade, and his stories of how they
crowded sail and took every risk to bring in their
cargoes are many and thrilling. Fruit, of course, is
highly perishable, and while it might be a valuable
cargo one day, a week later it would be worthless;
therefore the sea races and adventures.”
In an article, “Some Samples of Yankee Shrewdness,”
appearing in the American Magazine, Mr.
Lincoln has told stories of Cape Cod captains
he has known. Acuity of observation, caution joined
to a quality of going in head-first if one goes in at
all, and a singularly dry humour are a large part
of the “shrewdness,” as Lincoln makes it out. In
the course of the article he offers this admittedly
serious statement:
“In all my forty-odd years of experience with
Yankees I do not remember ever having met one
who habitually whittled. I have, of course, known
some who whittled occasionally, when they were
making a ‘bow ’n’ arrer’ or a boat for one of the
children. But I never knew one who whittled when
he was making a trade.” Sic transit the “Yankee”
of one species of “fiction” and drama. But it is
time to look at Mr. Lincoln’s own fiction; then,
perhaps, we may revert for a closing glance at the
puzzle of Yankee shrewdness.
v
The newest Lincoln novel (1923) is Doctor Nye
of North Ostable—Mr. Lincoln has something of a
gift in titles for his special kind of book. There
is a comfortable assurance in knowing that one is
going to read about Dr. Nye, or a place called
Fair Harbour, or an individual named Keziah
Coffin, or the sure-to-be-amusing process of Extricating
Obadiah. That last has a music of the syllables;
it is solitary in this respect among Lincoln
titles which are also easily affected by climatic
changes, so that Galusha the Magnificent had to be
altered in England to The Magnificent Mr. Bangs.
But to return to our fishing—
Ephraim Nye, M.D., a “sympathetic” hero,
self-sacrificing, a man with a deal of humour,
has a black cloud over his past, as all North Ostable
knows. The story opens with his return to that
Cape Cod village. All that day Marietta Lamb
(“Mary’s Lamb”) had been scrubbing away at a
great rate in the old Dillingham house, so long
untenanted, and Henry Ward Beecher Payson, in
full working regalia of overalls and wooden leg (for
“best” and Sundays he had a cork leg) was busy in
the yard. Miss Althea Bemis, who lived across the
road and missed nothing that went on among her
neighbours, asked innumerable questions, learning
nothing. Judge Copeland, Cyrenus Stone and
Cap’n Mark Bearse, “natives,” and “the three most
influential men in North Ostable” appeared on the
scene. The Judge and Stone were bitter political
enemies, always flying at each other’s throats.
Stone, who owned the empty house, admitted to
Cap’n Mark Bearse that the place was being made
ready for someone whose coming would be a great
surprise.
Then, at nightfall, Doctor Eph arrived in a ramshackle
gig.
People sat up late that night in North Ostable.
In the home of Shubal Bash discussion ran high as
Shubal and his wife, Angelina, tried to tell deaf old
Aunt Lidy the story of Ephraim Nye. After
studying medicine, the young Ephraim had married
Judge Copeland’s sister, Fanny, and had returned
to his native town to practise. Fanny was
fond of clothes and jewels and the Doctor worked
hard to give them to her. Respected and liked,
everyone turned against him when it was discovered
that $7,200 of the $10,000 in the fund for the new
meeting-house, of which he was treasurer, had been
stolen. The bank had exhibited a check for $7,200
signed “Ephraim Nye, Treasurer,” and the Doctor
admitted the check to be his. His wife was very
ill at the time. After her death, which occurred
shortly, Ephraim Nye was tried and sentenced to
five years in State’s prison. Later the money began
to come back in instalments until it was all paid up.
Always the sums were sent through Doctor Nye’s
lawyer.
The two enemies, Cyrenus Stone and Judge
Copeland, have, respectively, a son and a daughter;
and Tom Stone and Faith Copeland are young
lovers.
The stage is now set for Mr. Lincoln’s story. And
immediately, in a backward glance, one gets the rapid
impression that the plot consists entirely of typhoid
fever. Such an impression, however, is quite unjust.
Doctor Nye is one of the more carefully articulated
(or more carefully complicated) Lincoln novels. In
addition to the revelation forming the climax of the
story and putting Ephraim Nye in a heroic light,
there is a fully-constituted early love affair for the
Doctor, brought back and actively developed; there
is the pair of young lovers, Tom and Faith; there
is the prolonged duel between Judge Copeland and
the Doctor; there is a considerable variety of minor
incidents essential to the movement of the tale and
to its final outworking. All this, mind you, aside
from the real end sought by most readers of Mr.
Lincoln’s work—the exposition of “characters” and
the continuous oscillation into humour.
It is the humour, then, that most deserves our
scrutiny; for many of the Lincoln novels, practically
plotless beside such a tale as Doctor Nye, have only
the assets of their “characters” and humour to sustain
a popular interest which they have not failed
to feed. If there is any question about this, a glance
at the technical “descriptions” of half a dozen of
the books ought to settle the matter. Here, in a
sentence, is what some of them simmer down to:
Partners of the Tide. Cap’n Ezra Titcomb and
young Bradley Nickerson go into the wrecking business
and meet with a series of surprising adventures
and difficulties.
Cy Whittaker’s Place. Old Cy Whittaker, bachelor,
adopted a little girl. He and an old crony form
a “Board of Strategy” for her upbringing.
Keziah Coffin. Keziah Coffin, typical Cape Cod
old maid, proves the good angel of the minister in
his courtship. Incidentally, she turns out not to
be incurably an old maid.
The Postmaster. Cap’n Zeb Snow is discontented
with inactivity after retiring from the sea. As postmaster
he finds all the activity he wants.
Thankful’s Inheritance. Thankful Barnes and
her helper Emily lose their boarders when the house
proves to be “ha’nted,” but they gain a Cape Cod
sea captain and also a handsome young lawyer—for
life.
“Shavings.” The quaint, unbusinesslike windmill-maker
has no success in posing as a bank robber,
but his loyalty and shrewdness bring happiness to
all his friends.
The Portygee. The temperament and “calf love”
of the son of a Spanish opera singer make difficulties
with his Yankee grandfather.
vi
No plots, only complications; but there must be
admitted to be, within somewhat narrow bounds, a
considerable display of “characters.” Although
even here certain stock figures are (probably necessarily)
much employed—the gossiping old maid,
Mis’ Somebody-or-Other; the village comedian, like
Henry Ward Beecher Payson, who periodically
lapses from good behaviour and goes on sprees.
One of the most interesting of Lincoln’s portrayals
is Albert in The Portygee, a young fellow half
Spanish, half New Englander, with poetic and
artistic impulses. “Set there in the small hamlet,
chafing at the restraints and humdrumness of the
place, Albert makes a delicious contrast to the native
population,” says Hildegarde Hawthorne. “We
understand the passionate, temperamental boy as
well as his old Grandfather, with his fury against
all that sort of ‘foolishness,’ because their author
understands them.” I cannot go so far as Hildegarde
Hawthorne in praise of the variety or depth
of Mr. Lincoln’s characters, while cheerfully granting,
as I do, their frequent colour and whimsical
charm. Often and inevitably, I suppose, in the work
of one who has written two dozen books the “characters”
are not character, but a selected idiosyncrasy
or two. Often and inevitably in the case of one
who is not the inexhaustible and fecund creator, like
Dickens.
But there is the humour....
Now we have come to it. In the first place, Mr.
Lincoln shows the quick faculty evidenced from the
outset by Mary Roberts Rinehart of getting the
humour on every page. Mrs. Rinehart has not always
practised with that intention, but Mr. Lincoln
has never neglected the rapid shift of the reader’s
mood. To insure it, he does not hesitate to sacrifice
something of his more important scenes, making
them if necessary less dramatic. The common-sensicality
running through his stories is a solvent
to drama and a feeder to the spirit of fun; if it
makes it impossible for his story ever to leave the
ground, it also kills to a large extent the language,
or lingo, of sentimentality so-called, that terrible
jargon in which so much popular fiction is sugared
and preserved. Mr. Lincoln pickles his stories in
this salty common-sensibleness, rather—a breath of
Cape Cod air and a dip in the ocean brine. All his
“atmosphere” is as matter of fact as a dip in the
ocean, and the temperature is much more unvarying
and satisfactory ... unless you may find it tepid.
He is a funmaker, resorting without hesitation to
such crude and cheerful devices as the spree in which
Henry Ward Beecher Payson breaks his “Sunday
best,” or cork, leg. And yet fun warms the heart.
We laugh inanely, and afterward we have the feeling
of having laughed inanely, a sense of a slight
immoderacy or excess, of a mild dissipation which
perhaps has not really done us any good (though
the harm be passing and inconsiderable); but when
the moment comes we are ready to laugh again.
vii
A final note on that debateable Yankee shrewdness,
then....
Can we not find its fruitful exercise in Mr. Lincoln’s
own case? I think we can. Here was a man
of around thirty whose observation was keen, whose
caution was used to direct him in a proper self-committal,
whose own personal sense of humour was of
a sufficient dryness to keep him from the easy trails
of self-deception. Just as his friend, Captain
Lorenzo Baker, of Wellfleet, Massachusetts, was
able to discern in the casual remarks of a West Indian
the commercial possibilities of the yellow
banana, so Joseph C. Lincoln could perceive from a
token or two the personal possibilities of Cape Cod
as he could put it on paper. And acuteness, or, as
the Yankee says, ‘cuteness, having done its work,
that other trait of Yankee shrewdness, the caution
which restrains and then goes in headlong, was
brought into play. Mr. Lincoln committed himself
wholeheartedly to his fictional enterprise. He
put all his money, or rather, the energy which was
his equivalent for money, on the bob-tailed nag—in
a little sloop which was his own boat rather than
in somebody else’s two-masted schooner. The rest
was plain sailing and persistence that could have
been fatally spoiled if that inner dryness of wit and
clearness of perception had ever failed him. But
he never forgot that it was his own little sloop, the
sailing of which must be kept within the manœuvres
she could execute. He has never, for example, tried
to write the great American novel which, consciously
or unconsciously, has brought up into the wind, all
sails shaking and way lost, the craft of more than
one of his fellow sailors. A Yankee and shrewd,
earning many rewards, including that of a very
widespread affection.
Books by Joseph C. Lincoln
1902 Cape Cod Ballads
1904 Cap’n Eri
1905 Partners of the Tide
1906 Mr. Pratt
1907 The “Old Home House”
1908 Cy Whittaker’s Place
1909 Our Village
1909 Keziah Coffin
1910 The Depot Master
1911 Cap’n Warren’s Wards
1911 The Woman-Haters
1912 The Postmaster
1912 The Rise of Roscoe Paine
1913 Mr. Pratt’s Patients
1914 Cap’n Dan’s Daughter
1914 Kent Knowles: Quahaug
1915 Thankful’s Inheritance
1916 Mary-’Gusta
1917 Extricating Obadiah
1918 “Shavings”
1919 The Portygee
1921 Galusha the Magnificent
1922 Fair Harbor
1923 Doctor Nye of North Ostable
All fiction, except Cape Cod Ballads (verse) and
Our Village (sketches of life and people on the
Cape).
Sources on Joseph C. Lincoln
Joseph Crosby Lincoln. Booklet published by
D. APPLETON & COMPANY, 1921.
Joseph C. Lincoln’s America, by Hildegarde Hawthorne.
Booklet. D. APPLETON & COMPANY,
1921.
Some Samples of Yankee Shrewdness, by Joseph C.
Lincoln. Article in AMERICAN MAGAZINE, July,
1919.
My Types: An Interview with Joseph C. Lincoln,
by Charles Francis Reed, THE FORUM MAGAZINE,
February, 1919.
Cape Cod’s Genial Chronicler: An Appreciation by
Hamlin Garland. PUBLISHER’S WEEKLY, 17
April, 1920.
The Men Who Make Our Novels, by George Gordon.
MOFFAT, YARD & COMPANY, 1919.
Joseph Crosby Lincoln, by Adam C. Haeselbarth.
BOOK NEWS MONTHLY, 1913.
20. Edith Wharton and the Time Spirit
i
AT just past sixty Edith Wharton’s is still a
name for the literary conjuror in search of an
impressive effect. She has lived a long time—in
the literary sense—and comparisons are not easy;
she has outlived, as a writer, most comparisons, including
the one which would probably have been
fatal to anyone else, the comparison with Henry
James. She has outlived, in the physical sense,
Henry James himself; there are no more of his
frequent letters to “Dear Edith.” It is among the
subtler tributes to Mrs. Wharton, the person, that
the intellectual relation between her and the man
who was once called her “Master” is now seen in
a light which considerably enhances the dignity of
the woman who was once called “Pupil.” For who,
after reading the correspondence of Henry James,
published since his death, believes any longer that
Mrs. Wharton ever owed anything to that man’s
patronage so nicely tinctured with snobbery? Victor
Hugo permitted himself to be surrounded by those
who worshipped him as a god, but Hugo posed, godlike;
whereas Henry James——
Mrs. Atherton is several years older than Edith
Wharton, both as person and author; Mary Johnston,
born eight years later, is of almost exactly the
same literary age; but the first is a superb journalist
and a born storyteller and the second is a mystic and
a historian. Mrs. Wharton’s journalism in fiction
is pretty well confined to The House of Mirth and
The Fruit of the Tree; she invites comparison with
Mary Johnston only in that ambitious novel of
mediæval Italy, The Valley of Decision. In the
two books on which Mrs. Wharton’s fame definitely
rests at the present, Ethan Frome and The Age of
Innocence, she achieves a success and an individuality
only the more interesting because it finds so
strikingly different expressions.
In fact, on the evidence of the two stories, it
would be superficially impossible to assert that the
“sterile” tragedy of New England hillsides was
from the same hand that wrote the minutely detailed
story of New York society in the 1870s. Considered
for their meaning and origin, Ethan Frome and
The Age of Innocence are both seen to be tales of
frustration, both tales of the America that Mrs.
Wharton quitted some fifteen years ago but can’t
get out of her system, and both stories in which the
background is responsible for the actors themselves
as well as the play.
ii
EDITH WHARTON
Edith Newbold Jones was born in New York,
24 January, 1862, the daughter of Frederic Jones
who had married Lucretia Stevens Rhinelander.
One grandparent was a Stevens, another a Schermerhorn.
A great deal of her childhood was spent in
Europe—there was one stretch of five years in which
the family didn’t return to America—and education
proceeded wholly with the aid of tutors and governesses.
The child learned French, German and
Italian. Such summers as the family devoted to
America were lived in a house at Newport, on the
bay, halfway out towards Fort Adams. When Miss
Jones was twenty-three she became the wife of
Edward Wharton, of Boston. They lived in New
York and Newport and later at Lenox in the summer,
frequent visits to Europe continuing. Miss
Jones and Mrs. Wharton were equally interested in
writing and read extensively Goethe, Balzac,
Thackeray, Dickens, Flaubert, George Eliot, Meredith
and—Henry James? That last one had begun
as author while Miss Jones was still in her teens.
Twenty years were to pass before she started to overtake
him. Mrs. Wharton was thirty-seven in the
year when her first book was published, The Greater
Inclination, containing, according to Katharine Fullerton
Gerould, “two of the best stories she ever
wrote” (“The Pelican” and “Souls Belated”).
Six years later came The House of Mirth, “the
tragedy of the woman who is a little too weak to do
without money and what it buys, or to earn it for
herself, and a little too good to sell herself.” The
story of Lily Bart had to a high degree that provocative
quality which can generally be relied upon
to make a novel a best-seller; and a best-seller it
became. Soon afterward, with a feeling in which
satisfaction, distaste, caution and physical preferences
were obscurely blended, Mrs. Wharton settled
in France—winter home in Provence, summer home
near Paris. In 1914 she opened a workroom for
skilled woman workers thrown out of employment
by the miscalculations of Napoleon III. a generation
earlier. She also opened restaurants where French
and Belgian refugees were fed at less than cost, and
lodgings where they might sleep. Mrs. Wharton
took full charge of over 600 Belgian children who
had been withdrawn from orphanages near Furnes
and Poperinghe and established them, with the nuns
who had the children’s care, in four colonies, where
the girls were taught fine sewing and lace-making,
in anticipation of a day when fine sewing and lace-making
would again be demanded. For these services
the French Government, in 1915, conferred on
the American novelist the cross of the Legion of
Honour. During the war Mrs. Wharton wrote
little. Fighting France records her visits to the
French fronts; she contributed to The Book of the
Homeless; in 1918 was published her long short
story of an American boy in the war, under the title,
The Marne; in 1920, In Morocco gave an account
of a visit to that country which she made with
General Lyautey, by invitation of the French Government.
French Ways and Their Meaning appeared
in 1919. The total roll of Mrs. Wharton’s
non-fiction is considerable and includes Italian
Villas and Their Gardens (1904), Italian Backgrounds
(1905), A Motor-Flight Through France
(1908), Artemis to Actæon and Other Verse
(1909), The Decoration of Houses, as well as the
books just mentioned. No article on Mrs. Wharton
would be complete unless mention was made of her
passion for gardening and her art in developing
beautiful gardens, both at her home in Hyères and
at St. Brice, near Paris.
iii
We have had it all carefully explained for us
by Mrs. Gerould how much more desirable it is that
Mrs. Wharton should give us—as she has generally
given us—studies of sophisticated people. Speaking
of Ethan Frome, and, in fact, merely mentioning
that masterpiece, for which, it would appear, she is
without admiration, Mrs. Gerould says of Mrs.
Wharton:
“She did not abandon her civilised and sophisticated
folk, for any length of time, to deal with
rustics. Let us hope that she never will abandon
them. There is vital truth in the Shakesperean
dictum that ‘the hand of little employment hath the
daintier sense.’ To put it roughly”—as a rustic, no
doubt, might put it—“the people who have leisure
to experience their own emotions, and the education
to show them how the emotions fit into the traditions
of the race, are more interesting in themselves
than the people whose emotions are bound to be on
a more nearly animal plane. It is less interesting,
morally, to the average man to know how the sub-average
man conducts himself than to know how the
super-average man conducts himself. It does not
in the least matter to the average intelligent citizen—except
as it may touch his social conscience—how
the characters in certain modern novels behave, because
those characters are not the real fruit of
civilisation. They are, at best, its sorry by-products.
They do not help him out in his own problems; they
do not stand to him for vicarious experience.
Whereas it is of interest to a civilised man to know
how other civilised beings, in situations his own or
other, behave; even if they behave badly. Theirs
are dramas that he can feel, theirs is conduct that
he is competent to judge; they respond, or fail to
respond, to an admitted code of moral taste. No
creature was beyond the range of Shakespeare’s
sympathetic understanding; but when he wished to
probe the human heart most deeply, he usually chose
the heart of a king. The insensitive and the subnormal
served him chiefly for comedy.
“So that a positive purpose is served by the competent
novelist’s choosing to deal with the more
fortunate classes. Inhibitions have more chance;
and inhibitions are as necessary to real drama as are
passions. There is also—naturally—more opportunity
for satire; and satiric comment is inveterate
in Mrs. Wharton’s work. If the person who has
had every chance is not fine, then he is relatively
uglier than the person who has had no chance at all.
She does not spare her aristocrats who had an opportunity
for moral fineness and neglected it. The
baser emotions are more shocking in a world where
there is less excuse for them. And since it is real
life with which Mrs. Wharton is dealing, the baser
emotions frequently appear.”
These words were written after, not before, the
publication of Mrs. Wharton’s novel, The Glimpses
of the Moon (1922).
At sixty, one either prepares to die or one faces life
anew. In the latter event one knows, if one chances
to be a writer, the heavenly and earthly certitudes
... and the escape from platitudes is final. Thus,
for example, it is given to understand that a reputation
will at least last for the remainder of a lifetime
but that markets change. And, after all, as Mrs.
Wharton once remarked, cleanliness and comfort
are the two most expensive things on earth—comfort
implying whatever degree of luxury is essential
to a state of mind in which one can do work to purchase
continued comfort. At sixty, though one may
now and again bounce it high in the air, the real
and right concern is to keep the ball a-rolling....
Let people think what they like and say what they
like (and the follies of attack and fence are always
equal), the unerring perception is directed toward
the next thing that is to be written. One may
exercise a choice from the very limited amount of
material one has or can acquire; at sixty, it is too
late to acquire much additional. Of course, a finely
cultivated imagination in early years might come
to the rescue with a second blooming; but suppose
one’s imagination has always moved in the best
society? No, it doesn’t do, it most decidedly
doesn’t do to speculate any longer about anything;
let others pretend what they like, there is a positive
relief in the knowledge that one writes what one
can when one has to—and be it good, bad, indifferent
or astonishing the aim was an honest aim and
the result achieved was, at least, intelligent.
iv
And what could place Mrs. Wharton in a clearer,
finer light than just this situation of fact? What
could be more in keeping with the two traditions
that have bound her life?—the tradition of an older
New York and the literary tradition of France, both
strict and both congenial, both so severe as by their
very classicism to give the greatest possible scope
to personality. The New York of the Age of Innocence
into which she was born, the literary Europe
of the nineteenth century to which she so early attached
herself—these were the ideal forcing-beds
of a personality such as hers. You come upon her
expressing in vigorous words her delighted enthusiasm
for the first novel of William Gerhardi: “You
not only make your people live, but move and grow—and
that’s the very devil to achieve. Do, for all
our sakes, keep it up!” There is no flabbiness about
her. She is past the pitfall of fanaticism and safe
beyond the quagmire of adulation. She does not
need to practise the conventional literary dishonesties
which close like traps upon novelists whose
fame is on the make and who still have much to
lose. She can say frankly: “There are moments—to
me at least—in the greatest of Russian novels,
and just as I feel the directing pressure of the novelist
most strongly on my shoulder, when somehow I
stumble, the path fades to a trail, the trail to a
sand-heap, and hopelessly I perceive that the clue
is gone, and that I no longer know which way the
master is seeking to propel me, because his people
are behaving as I never knew people to behave.”
What heresy! Here we all are kneeling on the
ground, touching foreheads and breathing the overpowering
incense burnt before the shrine of
Dostoievsky, and a voice is distinctly heard to
remark that the literary deity is perhaps not as
luminous as he should be! How many would dare
such a remark, or, if they ventured it, would command
from any of us the bravery of timid, relieved
assents? Not many; scarcely a one.
She has not always been so free; who, indeed, is
born to freedom? Saint Paul said he was, but a
price had been paid formerly; it always is. Henry
James, tormented to the end of his days by the
fact that his books really didn’t sell, wasn’t able to
pay the price. Thomas Hardy paid it at the cost
of silence as a novelist after the reception accorded
to Jude the Obscure. O. Henry, confronted with
the heavy total, shivered and shuddered. Every
man has his price, indeed, in quite another sense
from what that saying was coined to convey; it is
a price he must manage if he is to have the truth
for himself or tell it about others.
Mrs. Wharton’s greatest good fortune has probably
consisted, after all, in her realisation of this.
Did she learn it in France, that country where truth
lies at the bottom of a well ... and is not drawn
up but used as a mirror? You can see the perception
through nearly all of Mrs. Wharton’s work.
In her long novel of eighteenth century Italy, The
Valley of Decision, she is painting away with grand
strokes on a magnificent canvas; she wants to find
out if she really is suited to the execution of fictions
like the Romola of that George Eliot she once read
so attentively. Well, no; the result satisfies her
that she isn’t. So then she goes on with those short
stories in the writing of which she is so proficient,
and, a few years later, produces The House of
Mirth. The result is instructive; one might almost
say it was destructive. Mrs. Wharton definitely
learned that here was a kind of thing she could successfully
do, in terms of money and popularity. But
in other terms?
This was a question less easily answered. Two
years after The House of Mirth came The Fruit of
the Tree, with its highly interesting “problem” as
to whether it can ever be right for a physician or
nurse to accelerate and ease the death of a doomed
patient. This has been called, by the Folletts, Mrs.
Wharton’s “one lapse into artistic disintegration.”
But Mrs. Wharton was not thinking of art, but of
life. It had sharply come over her that the pursuit
of art in one or another form of preciosity would
land her where she didn’t wish to be landed. She
might be, as was charged, the woman who of all
women wrote most like a man; but she didn’t desire
to write like some men. If she could have been
Gustave Flaubert, perhaps ... but she saw no use
in being George Moore or—Henry James? The
whole contemporary French school left her unaffected;
she read them, but experienced no wish to
write like them; and in the midst of a freshly-running
sea of Continental literature she became more
than ever aware of her absolute and inescapable
Americanism. In a way, it was a tragedy. To think
that one could grow up in Europe, be, as it were,
a part of Europe, definitely adopt Europe, and yet
not to Europe belong! After steadily eyeing this
situation for a while she reacted without either tears
or temperament; and her reaction took the form
of a short novel which is among the most perfect
pieces of workmanship in English, the story of
Ethan Frome. The “hard shapeliness” of that tale
was the hard shapeliness of a full self-recognition,
the so-called “sterility” was the result of an individual
adjustment to the deepest personal need of
her remarkable nature. What she would once have
so wanted to give, she now knew she never could
give to the world, and her awakened consciousness
strove for the fit expression of this discovery in
terms of an art of which she knew something.
Ethan Frome, whatever else it may be (and it is
many things, some strange and all beautiful) is the
Magnificat of a woman in the hour of profoundest
personal disappointment. Such works of fiction
are especially rare, but, given the genuinely capable
writer, given the one hour of a lifetime, the masterpiece
is quite possible, yes, almost certain.
Ah! She had written it at last ... and she
could afford to let it stand there to her credit while,
with calmness and admirable fortitude she returned
to the region of The House of Mirth and The Fruit
of the Tree to add a study of divorce and parasitic
marriage called The Custom of the Country. The
resumption of the general warfare which has been
the custom of Europe during odd generations for
several centuries didn’t interfere with Summer
(1917), wherein Mrs. Wharton tried to combine
her established “material” with some of the qualities
of Ethan Frome—an experiment only moderately
a success. When she came later to write
The Age of Innocence she was, to all appearances,
in the happy position of desiring only to do a definite
and modest thing, a first-rate story of very
marketable quality, and then achieving something
distinctly beyond that.
v
Mrs. Wharton’s new novel, A Son at the Front,
is primarily a study of character and a portrayal of
the relation between a father and his son. The
father is Campton, a lame painter of some distinction
living in Paris. His son, George, has just
finished his education and the father is counting
on a trip to Italy for the chance, at last, to get
acquainted with the boy. Campton’s wife, Julia,
after divorcing him, married a rich American named
Brandt. The two also live in Paris and George has
for some years been supported by the Brandts,
spending part of his time with them. With this
position when the novel opens, end of July, 1914,
war intervenes, taking George from them because
of his French birth. Campton and Brandt, drawn
together by a common interest, pull what wires they
can to secure a clerical appointment for George.
The intensity of the war and initial reverses bring
Campton to regret that George should have been
willing to remain behind the lines. But word comes
that the son is lying wounded in hospital; he has
all the time been at the front but has concealed the
fact in writing home. Brought back to Paris, an
effort is made to keep him there, a shallow little
married woman of George’s acquaintance lending
what help she can; the huge compulsion of the war
is too great, however, and on his return to the front
George is again wounded, this time fatally. He
lives to hear that America is at last in the conflict
and to know that Campton and the rest have an
undivided aim while the war lasts. When George
dies, the others, feeling they have lost everything
except the hope of victory, bend themselves to help
toward that with such courage as they have left.
The record of wartime Paris, the shift of ideals
and the gradual sacrifice of all lesser purposes, the
resolution of smaller loyalties in a larger, the intimacy
of personal emotions—these, of course, are the
true substance of Mrs. Wharton’s story.
vi
You may comprehend her, in discourse with that
familiar of hers, the Time Spirit, in a dialogue running
somewhat as follows:
TIME SPIRIT: So, then, you’ve settled it with
yourself? You haven’t too many regrets, I hope?
MRS. WHARTON: Oh, no, thank you. You can’t
know what a sense of freedom, of satisfaction both
outer and inner, it gives! You see, I always had,
for ever so long, a few illusions—about myself and
my own work, I mean.
TIME SPIRIT (dryly): Most writers do. But now
that you are rid of them all, you aren’t finding it
impossible to go on?
MRS. WHARTON: I find it far more possible to
go on. I go on with ease and a lightness of heart.
There isn’t anything I wouldn’t write now, that I
mightn’t wake up and find myself to have written,
except the kind of thing I once was determined to
write. That sounds cloudy, no doubt; but what
I mean is very simple: I discovered that, contrary
to the old saying, it is life that is long and art that’s
fleeting.
TIME SPIRIT: Yes?
MRS. WHARTON: Exactly. We live a long time,
and we write for a time not so long but pretty long,
too. If in those years of writing we achieve art
once or twice, we are among the rare, fortunate ones.
TIME SPIRIT: And the rest of the time?
MRS. WHARTON: The rest of the time we must
be industrious, but it is so much better if we are
clear in our own minds about it.
TIME SPIRIT: But, you know, you are really an
artist!
MRS. WHARTON: Retro me, Sathanas! I beg
your pardon, though; you couldn’t tempt me. I
know what I know. There are things I have had,
and have, to do without; but I don’t live with them;
I live with what I have. Of course, all kinds of
aims, and quite possibly some forms of achievement
will be conferred upon me by those who practise
the craft of fiction under the guise of criticism.
But I am clearly not responsible for what they say,
and it may not be used against me. I am only
responsible for what I myself say—and that is:
Nothing.
TIME SPIRIT: So you refuse to answer? On the
usual ground, of course; it might tend to incriminate
or degrade you?
MRS. WHARTON: I refuse to answer on the ground
that it might incriminate and degrade others who
write about me like this: “The House of Mirth,
Ethan Frome—these are orchestral in their richly
subtle clashing of overtones, a sort of infra-discordance
which is among the rare improbable finenesses
accessible to the artist, on condition of his
readiness to take infinite pains for infinitesimal
effects.”
TIME SPIRIT: Madame, permit me to deal lightly
with you.
MRS. WHARTON: Merci, monsieur. But I think
we have concluded our bargain, haven’t we?
Au ’voir.
Books by Edith Wharton
1899 The Greater Inclination
1900 The Touchstone
1901 Crucial Instances
1902 The Valley of Decision
1903 Sanctuary
1904 The Descent of Man, and Other Stories
1904 Italian Villas and Their Gardens
1905 Italian Backgrounds
1905 The House of Mirth
1907 Madame de Treymes
1907 The Fruit of the Tree
1908 The Hermit and the Wild Woman
1908 A Motor-Flight Through France
1909 Artemis to Actæon and Other Verse
1910 Tales of Men and Ghosts
1911 Ethan Frome
1912 The Reef
1913 The Custom of the Country
1915 The Book of the Homeless
1915 Fighting France The Decoration of Houses The Joy of Living
1917 Xingu and Other Stories
1917 Summer
1918 The Marne
1919 French Ways and Their Meaning
1919 In Morocco
1920 The Age of Innocence
1922 The Glimpses of the Moon
1923 A Son at the Front
Sources on Edith Wharton
Contemporary American Novelists, 1900-1920, by
Carl Van Doren. THE MACMILLAN COMPANY,
1922.
Some Modern Novelists, by Helen Thomas Follett
and Wilson Follett. HENRY HOLT & COMPANY,
1918. The chapter deals with Mrs. Wharton’s
work up to and including Summer. Her novel,
The Valley of Decision, is singled out for especial
emphasis.
Edith Wharton, A Critical Study, by Katharine
Fullerton Gerould. Booklet published by D. APPLETON
& COMPANY, 1922. A spirited exposition
of what are conceived to be Mrs. Wharton’s special
qualities by a woman whose interest lies
particularly in Mrs. Wharton’s material.
21. The Unclassified Case of Christopher Morley
i
TO know Christopher Morley is to be interested,
amused, enthusiastic, sceptical or even secretly
puzzled; but to have him for a friend is to learn
the meaning of friendliness in a degree that is very
exceptional. And few escape being his friends,
though this is less true than formerly. There was,
indeed, once a time when the friendship of Morley
was among the two or three serious responsibilities
of an individual’s life—like marriage, or filial duty
or a conscience in regard to one’s chosen craft.
Practically every day, sometimes twice in a day, the
evidence of Morley’s friendliness would appear in
a brief letter or hastily-penned note about this or
that or the other thing under the sun.
An image arose of an ever-active, a sleepless
mind; of an emotional nature more unresting than
the Atlantic and quantitatively as great. This
awful abstraction slowly faded out into a visual
image of a “burly” man with a smiling face and a
lighted pipe, and that, in turn, gave place to the
fear lest so much confidence in the human race
should prove fatally misplaced.... Somewhat, it
has; but what we didn’t foresee was that the change,
coming about gradually, would operate as a gradual
salvation of (1) his friends from Morley, (2)
Morley from his friends, (3) Morley’s work from
Friend Morley.
Yet this beneficial and important transformation
has been accomplished in the most salutary manner,
with a result that may accrue with permanence and
advantage to American literature.
ii
Christopher Morley
As lately as 1920 one estimating American talents
could observe of Morley: “His gift is purely journalistic,
isn’t it?” and receive the answer from
Morley’s friend: “Purely”—an answer conceived
in entire truthfulness. Both the asker and the
answerer were pretty certain to regard the assumed
fact as a great pity. But as to the fact!—why,
what further evidence was needed to establish it?
Morley had been writing for several years, had
averaged several books a year of prose and verse,
and nowhere gave the least sign of doing work of a
different character. What, then, was the character
of his work in those years? He began at Oxford
with a book of verse; from a more actual standpoint
his beginnings had been made with Parnassus on
Wheels, published in 1917. This really capital
conceit had engendered a sequel, The Haunted
Bookshop, published two years later. There were
certain books of essays—Shandygaff, Mince Pie,
Pipefuls—pleasant, partly serious, sometimes sentimental
and showing a deplorable fondness for the
pun. There were books of verse—Songs for aLittle House, The Rocking Horse, Hide and Seek.
Travels in Philadelphia, the short story, Kathleen,
and an unfortunate collaboration called In the
Sweet Dry and Dry completed the roll. It is no
reflection upon these volumes to say that they gave
the impression of a talent strictly journalistic; the
best journalism is more than ephemeral and most of
the titles enumerated are still actively in demand.
The quality we call “journalism” is not an affair of
perishability but something very difficult to define,
something in the approach, something in the treatment
rather than in the choice of subjects. In the
last analysis it is probable that the effort to define
it would end with hands flung out hopelessly before
the mystery of a personal temperament.
The facts were these: Morley had been educated
at Haverford College and Oxford; he had then
come to Garden City to work for the publishing
house which, principally, has published his prose,
and his first enterprises as an author were precociously
instructed by an “inside” acquaintance
with what James Branch Cabell would call the
auctorial career. The influence upon his own work
of this very special knowledge is not easy to estimate.
He saw, as only one in a publishing house
sees, the facts of authorship after the author’s child
is born. For example: the immense effect upon the
fortunes of a writer’s book, or books, of the attitude
toward them of the bookseller. And that attitude
is quite rightly fixed by what the bookseller (1)
knows he can sell, or, less frequently (2), by what
he thinks he can sell.
Morley saw that books are sold through bookstores.
Looking a little further, he discerned that
books which are not in bookstores are, with certain
class exceptions, very rarely sold. He learned, as
everyone in a publishing house learns, that three-quarters
of the books that are sold to retail purchasers
are bought because retail purchasers have
had these books thrust directly under their noses.
He suffered, no doubt, the customary amazement
on discovering the vast number of people who (1)
either enter the bookstore with no particular book
in mind, or (2), on being unable to obtain the book
in mind, readily take something else. It was
brought to his keen attention that, as Frank Swinnerton
reiterates in his admirable brochure on
“Authors and Advertising,” direct advertising, as in
newspapers and magazines (the commonest mediums)
does not sell books. Being a young man of
alert perceptions, it cannot have been lost upon
him that book reviews do not, with any reliability,
sell books, either. What does sell books is talk—in
some instances—but the hard rock foundation of
book sales is a favourable attitude on the part of
“the trade.”
To know the people in the bookstore, to have and
to cultivate and to deserve their good will (for, in
the long run, you must deserve it), and thus to
insure the sale of your book to the bookseller and to
enlist his energy and enterprise in re-selling it to
his customers—this is the “favourable attitude”
just mentioned. Few authors succeed in establishing
it; fewer succeed in maintaining it. Mr.
Morley has done both, with the result that in five
years from the time of his Parnassus on Wheels he
has been able to publish a highly imaginative, refined
and polished satire and see it become, in its
field, a pronounced best seller.
iii
One would about as soon expect to see a fantasy
by Lord Dunsany a best seller as witness the sale,
in tens of thousands, of Morley’s Where the Blue
Begins—if one were making one’s estimate solely
on the work itself. Where the Blue Begins is the
story of the dog Gissing’s search for God—a search
conducted in various places and circumstances
parallel to human life of the present day by an
animal discreetly analogued to the human animal.
Such a piece of writing has ordinarily no hope except
from unusual and very favourable (or acutely
controversial) critical attention; and the hope from
that quarter is relatively small. By “hope,” of
course, is meant a hope of a considerable sale.
Where the Blue Begins belongs to that class of
literature which is written because it has lain in the
author’s heart to write it, regardless of its fate after
it lies on paper. In the case of Mr. Morley, the
work has received merited praise; but it would be
naïve to suppose that this notice and commendation
sold the book; and the book trade might even
justifiably be indignant at such a supposition. Did
not they, the booksellers, buy Where the Blue
Begins because it was Morley’s new book? And
did not they and their clerks “push” the book for
the same reason? The Ayes have it, to both questions,
and unanimously.
On the other hand, the sceptical soul who argues
that Chris Morley wrote Parnassus on Wheels, in
the first place, because it was a story about a bookseller
calculated to “get him in right” with the
trade—that man does not know Morley and shows
that he does not know him. It is possible to detect
in the character of Morley’s work, in the circumstance
of its publication and in the accessories provided
for that publication evidences of a singularly
intelligent literary campaign; it is possible to detect
them and believe them to be such; but it is not
possible to over-estimate the part played by Morley’s
own naïveté, affectionate nature and formerly
unchecked and indiscriminate enthusiasm.
Such an attitude is always open to misconstruction.
But it takes real intelligence to go beneath
the surface; and among Morley’s friends were many
who could do that. These perceived his genuineness
without being in the least able to predict the
outcome of his generosity. Ours is a world thus
and thus and so and so. The ultimate effect upon
Morley himself of a disposition which he would
unquestionably see suffer and change was the problem.
It would be very easy for him to come a
tremendous cropper of any one of several sorts; and
then should we have a soured, an embittered young
man? Prophecy was worthless.
Meanwhile, with the auspicious beginning of
Parnassus on Wheels, the young man went gaily on.
His first book of verse (barring the Oxford experiment)
was published in the same year under
the valuable title, Songs for a Little House; and at
once the small beginnings of a Morley vogue were
faintly perceptible. The suspicion that such a title
harboured a spirit committed to the sentimental
attitude toward life was confirmed within a year by
the publication of a book of essays, Shandygaff,
named after a reputed or actual beverage and got
up with a deliberately quaint title page. One was
left in no doubt that Morley liked Stevenson, was
affectionately fond of Robert Cortes Holliday, and
worshipped the genius of Don Marquis. The seeds
of literary jealousy were sown, to be harvested several
years later in accusations of log-rolling[2] that
were levelled at others a-plenty besides Morley.
Here, however, it should be explained that Morley
had come from Oxford to go to work, at the age
of twenty-three, at Garden City; that while learning
the publishing business he had married Miss
Helen Booth Fairchild, a New York girl whom he
had met in England. If, therefore, he modestly
undertook to become the American poet of domesticity
with his songs for households “of two or more,”
the guilt should by no means be made personal
to him, but may justly be laid at the door of the
race.
[2] The term is borrowed from the Congress of the United States,
where it has long been employed, quite unofficially, to describe an
exchange of favors among Congressmen, some voting for another’s
bill in exchange for his favorable vote upon their pet measures.
As here used, it refers to the alleged praise of one writer by
another in tacit exchange for similar praise back; the public being
expected to take both encomiums at face value and without any
discounting for personal friendship, etc. Whether the public has
ever quite done so is possibly to be doubted; but, at any rate, in
the winter of 1921-22, New York and some other literary circles
were so openly under suspicion of log-rolling that the suspects
were not able to ignore the charges openly made. The boldest
method of counter-attack adopted was that of Heywood Broun,
who ridiculed the accusation, not quite successfully from every
standpoint. There was, however, an immediate and noticeable
diminution of enthusiasm among some of the younger writers
for each other’s work, publicly expressed. Morley himself, discussing
the matter of log-rolling, explained that the accusers had
the cart before the horse; that commonly one liked another man’s
work and praised it, and in consequence thereof came into a personal
acquaintance. This is without doubt frequently the true
situation.
The year following Shandygaff witnessed the
appearance of another book of verse, The Rocking
Horse; the sequel to Parnassus on Wheels, entitled
The Haunted Bookshop; and a book done in collaboration
with Bart Haley. Called In the Sweet
Dry and Dry, this is quite exceptional among Morley
books, and not too common among any books,
for its badness. An extravaganza on the subject
of prohibition, the plot may be said to have resided
mainly in incessant and outrageous puns, at that
time a pronounced Morley weakness. But again it
is necessary to point out a detail which, taken in
one light, and, as I think, the proper light, reflects
great personal credit on Mr. Morley; he has never
disowned the bad book. He could not do so openly,
of course—copies probably exist—but he has not
done so tacitly, as he might have without question
or comment. I have in mind a little booklet on
Christopher Morley published in 1922 and concluding
with a bibliography. There it stands: “In the
Sweet Dry and Dry, Boni and Liveright, 1919.
(In collaboration with Bart Haley, out of print.)”
The book, no doubt. George Moore and Henry
James, not to mention other men of literary genius,
have had occasion to be ashamed of their work and
to drop it quietly from the roll. I like Mr. Morley
for not doing so.
iv
Christopher Darlington Morley was born at
Haverford, Pennsylvania, 5 May, 1890, of parents
both English by birth but long Americans by residence.
Dr. Frank Morley, an English Quaker of
Woodbridge, Suffolk—the home of Edward Fitzgerald—was
graduated at Cambridge and came to
Haverford in 1887 as professor of mathematics.
His wife was Lilian Janet Bird, of Hayward’s
Heath, in Sussex, a woman of some musical and
poetical gifts, the daughter of a man at one time
with the London publishing house of Chapman and
Hall. CDM frequently praises her cooking, which
blended as an influence on his boyhood with the
Haverford campus, where cricket is played. In
1900 Professor Morley went to Baltimore and
Johns Hopkins. His son entered Haverford in
1906, was graduated in 1910 and, in the same year,
was chosen as Rhodes Scholar representing Maryland.
The three years at Oxford were spent at New
College. In the title-poem of a new book of verse,
Parson’s Pleasure—the name of the old bathing
pool on the Cherwell at Oxford—occur the lines:
Two breeding-places I have known
Where germinal my heart was sown;
Two places from which I inherit
The present business of my spirit:
Haverford, Oxford, quietly
May make a poet out of me.
The confused exigencies of his native land, however,
were, more immediately, to make something
else out of him. Repairing to Garden City, he interviewed
Mr. F. N. Doubleday, otherwise FND
(“Effendi”) on the matter of a job. Mr. Doubleday
has preserved the record of that interview in an
amusing account which fully displays the youth,
eagerness, enthusiasm and amiable audacity of the
twenty-three-year-old. The noted Effendi, whose
philosophy of life is not without its Oriental suggestions
and whose sense of humour is at such times
gently active, was feeling “a little weighted down
that morning with the difficulties of the job which
the President of Doubleday, Page & Company takes
as a daily routine,” and therefore finally told Morley
“to go to work at all his manifold plans and
literary philanderings, reserving the right to restrain
his commitments if necessary.”
It was Morley who discovered William McFee.
English sheets of that long and very fine novel,
Casuals of the Sea, had been submitted to the firm
for consideration and possible purchase. Ultimately
it became necessary to set up type for the
novel in America. “We were accustomed,” Mr.
Doubleday explains, “to hold what we called a
‘book-meeting,’ when each member of the staff gave
his suggestion about authors and books. For months
when it came Christopher’s turn to speak he always
began, ‘Now, about McFee—we don’t appreciate
what a comer he is’ and so on for five minutes without
taking a breath until finally it became the joke
of the meeting that nothing could be done until
Morley’s McFee speech had been made. Our jibes
influenced him not at all. His only reply to our
efforts in humour was to bring on a look of great
seriousness and the eternal phrase, ‘Now, about
McFee.’”
In leaving Garden City after a stay of nearly four
years to become, in his own phrase, one of the “little
group of wilful men who edit the Ladies’ Home
Journal,” CDM departed from the well-established
tradition under which so many men in the book
publishing business have fallen. It is some kind
of a tribute to Doubleday, Page & Company that
the house has been the training-place of a considerable
number of the heads in other publishing
houses. In Philadelphia a term on the Ladies’
Home Journal was followed by work as a columnist
on the Evening Public Ledger, the direct preliminary
to Morley’s column on the editorial page of
the New York Evening Post, with which he has
been since 1920. The book, Travels in Philadelphia;
the personal acquaintance of A. Edward
Newton, author of The Amenities of Book Collecting
and Kindred Affections; and a deepened interest
in Walt Whitman, are some of the concomitants of
the Philadelphia period. Also, I think, Morley’s
gradual disillusionment began then. The collection
of essays called Mince Pie was published late in
1919 and there were still to appear, in 1920, certain
overflowings of the Morley of the first period—the
story of an Oxford undergraduate prank, called
Kathleen; a book of verse, Hide and Seek; and
more essays in Pipefuls. But that was to be about
all. Something very definite had happened to the
young man who was so friendly with everybody,
who was forever talking about William McFee,
who wrote forty-leven letters and notes a day, who
had made a cult of quaintness and who liked to be
called Kit and to have the resemblance of his name
to that of Christopher Marlowe’s stretched into a
fanciful resemblance of personalities and writing.
Some lone reviewer, speaking harshly; or some
slight wound received in the house of one of his
friends; or the shifts and vicissitudes of commercial
enterprise—dissatisfaction with what he had already
done, a thirtieth birthday, a wish to do something
he had yet to do—together or singly may
have been the agents of the change. Only the
change itself matters. And what was that? It
was not that Chris became less friendly, or autographed
fewer dozens of copies of a new book of
his, or loved the Elizabethans less or the work of
Theodore Dreiser more. But a retractation took
place, an alteration of ideas went on ... aided, it
may be, by the uniformity with which American
magazine editors rejected a short story called “Referred
to the Author,” one of the contents of Morley’s
book Tales from a Rolltop Desk—a story
which Morley himself thinks marks the definite line
between his old work and new.
v
Those who care for the poet of “households of
two or more” will find him most readily now in the
volume called Chimneysmoke (1921), which is a
representative selection from the earlier books of
verse, Songs for a Little House, The Rocking Horse,
and Hide and Seek. Vincent O’Sullivan has said
that the Morley here represented belongs with “the
English intimists, Herrick, George Herbert, Cowper,
Crabbe.” Writing an introduction for the
English edition of Chimneysmoke, E. V. Lucas remarked:
“Domesticity has had many celebrants,
but I cannot remember any one work in which such
a number of the expressions of Everyman, in his
capacity as householder, husband and father, have
been touched upon, and touched upon so happily
and with such deep and simple sincerity. The poet
of ‘The Angel in the House’ was, I suppose, a
predecessor; but Coventry Patmore was a mystic
and a rhapsodist, whereas Mr. Morley keeps on a
more normal plane and puts in verse, thoughts and
feelings and excitements that most of us have
known but have lacked the skill or will to epigrammatise.
If we are to look in literature for a kindred
spirit to Mr. Morley’s we find it rather in the author
of ‘The Cotter’s Saturday Night.’”
Morley’s new book of essays, The Powder of
Sympathy, shows the man changed and changing.
It would be impossible to detect any loss of humour
or cheerfulness in such papers as those on Sir Kenelm
Digby or the Morley automobile, Dame Quickly
(to be succeeded some day by the more impressive
Dean Swift). But the satire in “The Story of
Ginger Cubes” is not less complete or sharp for
being throughout good-natured; and in his piece on
“The Unknown Citizen” Morley seems to me to
strike a single magnificent chord in which satire and
humour are simply notes underlain by the deep bass
of pathos and truth. The new book of poems,
Parson’s Pleasure, shows that where there was so
much Chimneysmoke a fire burns also. This book
has an inspiring and inspiriting essay for preface—one
far too quotable; I must resist it. Instead, let
me give the first sonnet in the “Memoranda for a
Sonnet Sequence”:
The herb Lunaria, old books aver,
If gathered thus and so, in moony patches,
Has property of mystic opener
When laid upon the fastest locks and latches.
In this respect, the moonplant duly matches
The magic of the poets, who bestir
Their art to loosen spirit’s careful catches
And split our secret bolts like gossamer.
To sprinkle moonseed on the tight-locked soul
Bidding it open, or stand soft ajar—
To sprinkle moonseed, gathered thus and so,
This is the poet’s honourable rôle.
Like some old Tudor captain bound afar
I hear him crying Inward! Inward Ho!
Books by Christopher Morley
1912 The Eighth Sin. Oxford: B. H. BLACKWELL. Out of print
1917 Parnassus on Wheels
1917 Songs for a Little House
1918 Shandygaff
1919 The Rocking Horse
1919 The Haunted Bookshop
1919 In the Sweet Dry and Dry. Written in collaboration with Bart Haley. Out of print
1919 Mince Pie
1920 Travels in Philadelphia.DAVID MCKAY COMPANY
1920 Kathleen
1920 Hide and Seek
1920 Pipefuls
1921 Tales from a Rolltop Desk
1921 Plum Pudding
1921 Chimneysmoke
1921 Modern Essays (an anthology, selected and with an introduction and biographical notes by Christopher Morley). HARCOURT, BRACE & COMPANY
1922 Thursday Evening (a one-act play). STEWART & KIDD COMPANY
1922 Translations from the Chinese
1922 Where the Blue Begins
1922 Rehearsal (a one-act play), included in A Treasury of Plays for Women, edited by Frank Shay. LITTLE, BROWN & COMPANY
1923 The Powder of Sympathy
1923 Pandora Lifts the Lid (with DON MARQUIS)
1923 Parson’s Pleasure
Sources on Christopher Morley
Christopher Morley: A Biographical Sketch. Booklet
published by DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & CO., 1922.
Private Information.
22. The Prophecies of Lothrop Stoddard
i
PROPHECY is a very old business. It has become
our habit to think of ourselves as a people
without prophets; and yet there was never a time
when mankind had more seers or more interesting
ones. What is H. G. Wells but a prophesier, and
from whom do we receive counsel if not from Mr.
Chesterton? Mr. Shaw is our Job’s comforter, and
George Horace Lorimer, on the editorial page of
Saturday Evening Post, calls us to repentance. A
few years ago I had the adventure of reading
Madison Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race,
an impassioned proclamation of the merits of the
blond Nordic race, and a lamentation over its decay.
At that time such a book was in the nature of a
revelation whether you gave faith to its assertions
and proofs or scoffed at them. The thing that
struck me was the impossibility (as it seemed to
me) of any reader remaining unmoved; I thought
him bound to be carried to a high pitch of enthusiastic
affirmation or else roused to fierce resentment
and furious denial. And so, in the event, I
believe it mainly turned out. At that time, although
he was the author of several books, I had
not heard of Lothrop Stoddard, unless as a special
writer and correspondent for magazines. It was
not until April, 1920, that The Rising Tide of Color
Against White World-Supremacy was published.
Even so, attention is not readily attracted to a book
of this type. Many who have since read it with
excitement knew nothing of the volume until, in a
speech at Birmingham, Alabama, on 26 October,
1921, President Harding said: “Whoever will
take the time to read and ponder Mr. Lothrop
Stoddard’s book on The Rising Tide of Color ...
must realise that our race problem here in the
United States is only a phase of a race issue that
the whole world confronts.” The late Lord Northcliffe,
returning from a trip around the world,
declared: “Two far-seeing books, The New World
of Islam and The Rising Tide of Color, should be
in the library of every one who wants to know something
about the world of 1950.” Several months
before he died, Northcliffe spoke again to a newspaper
correspondent: “Have you read The Rising
Tide of Color? Then I want you to read it. I
want every white man to read it.”
ii
The New World of Islam followed The Rising
Tide of Color from Mr. Stoddard’s pen, or more
probably, as authors work nowadays, from his typewriter.
It brings out with detail and vividness a
situation which Hilaire Belloc made vivid also in
his American lectures in the spring of 1923, when
he remarked that, after all, we must remember it
was only two hundred years since the armies of
Mohammed stood outside the walls of Vienna. But
Mr. Belloc in a lecture had no time for details; he
stressed the remarkable spiritual unity (something
beyond merely religious unity) of Islam, tending
to match the condition of Europe in those centuries
when it was possible to lead Crusade after Crusade.
Mr. Stoddard, however, is a master of detail. His
book on the Mohammedan world is compact of
facts and figures, and concludes with one of the
most significant maps the world allows to be drawn
today. For it is not a day of satisfactory map-making;
too much is changing; but the great patches
of green on the chart at the close of The New World
of Islam do not change. The day is never past
when some dark-skinned Mahdi, like that false one
in Lytton Strachey’s portrait of “Chinese” Gordon,
may sit his horse “letting the scene grow under his
eyes,” watching the assembly of turbulent but vast
and unanimous armies, looking down upon the thousands
of upturned, fanatical faces, in a scene “dark
and violent and beautiful” ... and of enormous
import to the peoples of the earth.
His study of the coloured races and their gradual
predominance and his account of Islam seem to me
to be but preparatory, however, to Mr. Stoddard’s
book on The Revolt Against Civilization. This has
already passed through many editions, like the two
preceding volumes. “The reason why The Revolt
Against Civilization has attracted such an extraordinary
amount of attention is not far to seek,”
comments the Saturday Evening Post. “It is, so
far as we know, the first successful attempt to
present a scientific explanation of the worldwide
epidemic of unrest that broke out during the Great
War and still rages in both hemispheres.” The
book is a considered and noteworthily documented
argument against the Underman—to be conceived
of as the opposite of Nietzsche’s Superman. It was
Macaulay who remarked that if civilization is again
overthrown it will not be by the barbarian from
without but by the barbarian within—and Mr.
Stoddard’s case is, quite simply, that we have in our
civilisation an immense mass of inferior men, of
Undermen, who will drag us down and whom we
cannot lift up. Nor is he among those who advocate
terrorism. He would grant and secure to those
whom he regards as the foes of civilisation a wider
freedom of thought and speech than would many
who share his view of the actual situation. And as
a prophet is not allowed any longer to prophesy
unless he is prepared with a programme—must not
cry, “Woe! Woe!” unless he does so constructively—Mr.
Stoddard closes his book with two
chapters in which he disregards with something like
a surgeon’s magnificence and coolness the rooted
prejudices and inherited opinions of ordinary men
and women. This, he says very clearly and with
precision, is the path out; and he suggests that we
go to no further compromise than may be absolutely
inevitable in our mixed circumstances. Nothing is
more admirable in this American prophet than his
daring unless it is the level admixture of his common
sense.
iii
Who is Lothrop Stoddard? In the first place, his
name is Theodore Lothrop Stoddard. He is the
son of John Lawson Stoddard, and both father and
son were born in Brookline, Massachusetts, where
at 1768 Beacon Street, the son now has his residence.
The senior Stoddard travelled widely and
was known as the promoter of the Stoddard lectures
in the larger American cities for over twenty years.
His travel lectures fill fifteen volumes. Mr. Stoddard
retired from the platform in 1897 and lives
in the Italian Tyrol. The son, born in 1883, was
graduated from Harvard in 1905. He is unmarried.
The interests that lie back of his volumes are
reflected in his membership in the American Historical
Association, the American Political Science
Association, the American Sociological Society, the
Academy of Political Science, the National Institute
of Social Sciences, the American Genetic Association
and the Galton Society. But let Mr. Stoddard
speak for himself:
“I have always been interested in world affairs.
I spent a good deal of my early life in Europe and as
an undergraduate at Harvard most of my work was
along those lines, that is, history, politics, sociology,
and so forth. The four men who stimulated me
most were Professors A. C. Coolidge, T. N. Carver,
Toy, and R. M. Johnston. At that time, however,
I was intending to make the law my profession
and I took the law course and was admitted to the
Massachusetts bar at the beginning of 1908. The
immediate occasion for my undertaking my present
profession was a trip to Europe which I took at
that time. This trip was an extensive journey
through western and central Europe, occupying
most of the year 1908; it was in the nature of a
‘grand tour’ before settling down to the practice
of law. But when I was in Europe during that
year (the year of the second great political crisis
preceding the European War) I became convinced
of what I had already suspected, that a cataclysm
was inevitable in Europe within a relatively short
time. I further realised that in any such cataclysmic
struggle the United States would either be
directly involved or would at least be drawn out
of its isolation into the stream of world affairs. The
idea shaped itself strongly in my mind to fit myself
to become an expert on world affairs. I believe
that such experts were at that time very few in
number in America. However, I realised that if
America should be situated as I felt she would be
after a European disaster, such experts would be
greatly needed. To me such a career implied extensive
preparation and special training. In my
opinion the expert on world affairs must have a
high degree of technical knowledge such as cannot
result from the knowledge gained by travel, ordinary
reading or experience, however accurate that
knowledge may be. Especially is a thorough historical
background a prime necessity.
“Accordingly I proceeded to acquire the technical
knowledge and training which I judged necessary
by entering the Harvard Graduate School where I
spent four and a half years, from the autumn of
1909 to January, 1914, gaining incidentally my
A.M. and Ph.D. degrees. I was ready then actively
to practise my new profession. Nevertheless for
the first two or three years I did much more research
work on contemporary world affairs and future
tendencies than actual writing. I planned out a
long schedule of writing; and The Rising Tide of
Color is the first large item in that schedule.”
Books by Lothrop Stoddard
1914 The French Revolution in San Domingo
1917 Present-Day Europe—Its National States of Mind
1918 The Stakes of the War
1919 Harper’s Pictorial Library of the World War (Volume 6, The World at War)
1920 The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy
1921 The New World of Islam
1923 The Revolt Against Civilization