The Press. — London, England, 1856-09-20 00:00:00

SEPT. 20, 1856. yittraturt. THE SOCIAL USES OF FICTION. AN interesting topic has been mooted in literary circles, as to whether " serious social questions " can be legitimately used by the novelist for the exhibition of his art. Opposite opinions have been broached upon it by our contemporaries, and it is evident that there are two sides to the subject. The Spectator has said recently that the success of Uncle Toin's Cabin " for ever settled the question ; but the Atheneum, in its review of " Dred," has taken another view of it; and the im portance of the question is so great that it would be desirable to have definite conclusions upon it. There are certain established branches in literature wherein the voice of ages and the experience of authorship in various climes have enacted fixed rules. The laws of history and poetry, for example, were as well under stood by the ancients as they arc by the moderns; but the department of the novel, as read and composed in Germany, France, England, and America, may justly be consi dered as a purely modern invention. The detailed painting of character and manners, the variety of classes described, the tone of the reflections, and, last not least, the sort of persons by whom fiction is read, have given a most peculiar development to the novel, and it is difficult to say what other phases are in store for prose fiction. In our opinion, the philosophy of modern fiction is exactly the department of letters where critics should cautiously refrain from hasty inferences. Men of high scientific attainments egregiously com mitted themselves against the practicability of railways and ocean steamers ; and there may be some analogy between the result of steam applied to mechanics, and creative imagination concentrated on social utility. In order to estimate this question, let us see what is affirmed by the opponents of the pro priety of a novelist discussing grave social subjects. In doing so we shall not attempt to criticise our contemporaries. We shall refer to one of them only for the illustration of the question iu dispute. For example, the Atheneum has embodied in a paragraph nearly all that can be said on one Bide of it. In its review of " Dred" (No. 1505) it says : Serious social questions are not fit subjects for Art. Comedy, when there was comedy, dealt with manners, not with the problems of philosophy; and the Novel, which has superseded Comedy, because we stay at home and read instead of running to the theatre to hear, must deal with manners. Does Mrs. Stowe—does any of the fair patronesses of the slave at Sutherland-house—think M. Eugene Sue, or any other professed Socialist who might entertain such a fancy, for example, as that an aristocratic class is incompatible with morality, would be justified in presenting to European readers a picture of English life founded solely on the dark evidence of our police courts? Our newspapers give the materials of a picture black enough, and every artist knows what could be made of them. What instances of brutal tyranny—serpentine cun ning —shameless hypocrisy—might be adduced ! How much of wife beating—child poisoning—girl seducing— could be offered in support of a picture, showing that English life in our time is infinitely impure and murderous! Every one feels that this course would be profoundly false and foolish—mistaking the vein in the marble for the marble itself. The truth is, no broad social question can be adequately treated in a novel,—nor is it a legitimate subject for Art. A novel is in its nature a work of fancy, and subject to artificial regulations; selective as regards its subject and the mode of treatment, it can only deal with its materials from a certain point of view. The grouping both of characters, incidents, and azcessories must be worked to a definite end.—the story must gravitate to a conclusion and round itself handsomely off within a given number of pages, between the titlepage and the finis — and no social skein could ever be wound off in so com pendious a fashion. A novel that gives itself up to be the vehicle of • social problem—and its suilition—must fail as a story,—or if it succeed as a story it will probably deal with its graver purpose in an empirical spirit. In much of this we can concur ; but the dicta are too sweeping and too generalised. The real question, after all, is not there accurately stated. No thinking person could suppose that a novel should be used for " the solution" of a complex political or social question. The reference to " Comedy " proves nothing, be cause the novelist can deal with Tragedy, where he can describe the working of both the generous and malignant passions; and the statement that the Novel "must deal with THE PRESS. " manners," is much too arbitrary and limited. I Even in the incidental admission, " We stay " at home and read, instead of running to the " theatre to hear," an important acknowledg ment is made of the extraordinary " social" power of the modern novel. The drama, which held the first place in what Burke (when writing to Malone on his edition of Dryden) called "active literature," is now seriously influenced by the novelist's counter attraction. Such a change could scarcely have been anticipated in the days of Garrick. We may also remark that many of the ob jections which are made to the novelist taking up " serious social questions " might have been made to the proposal for introducing the historical element into fiction. It could have been said with equal plausibility, that the novelist deals with persons and individual positions. whereas history is general and broad, and concerned with public acts. Much keen logic and craftsmanlike disserta- tion might have been used to show that history, which should be true, could not pos sibly be blended with fiction, which must be inventive. And we might ourselves even affirm the soundness of the canon that an historical novel is too hybrid to be perfectly satisfactory to the critical mind. But what then ? Criticism is not creative ; and the appetite amongst readers for books giving fresh and strong sensations, and opening up large views to the mind, will help to give works much success, even though literary canons he violated. Scott in many respects falsified history, but he succeeded in enlarging the domain of fiction, and his mode of writing told even upon the writing of history, as the students of Thierry and readers of Macaulay well know. Indeed, Mr. Macaulay, in his essay in the Edinburgh Review on " History " (not reprinted in his collected works), showed plainly that the " Waverley " school of com position was before his mind from an early date. _ _ _ _ Before, therefore, hastily deciding that " serious social questions are not fit subjects " for Art," let us recollect how the novel has gradually enlarged itself from an insipid love tale into a representative and intellectual de partment of letters. Its past victories teach us not too rapidly to predict its failure in other directions. And let us consider other instances of the success of the novel. When reading " Uncle Tom' we recollect having been much struck with a resemblance between the comicality and humour of Mrs. Stowe's "niggers " and the Irish peasantry as described by various novelists. The fact is, that Miss Edgeworth did apply her rare genius for the humorous to " serious social questions." and with most remarkable suc cess. " Castle Rackrent" was more effective iu the exposure of improvident landlordism than a hundred essays from professed political economists ; and in most Irish novels (with the exception of those by Griffin) the social state of Ireland is continually brought before the reader. Lady Morgan's novels were like so many dramatic pamphlets on the Catholic question, and they were popular in their day. The Irish fictionists, also, deserve the credit of being the first who largely and successfully introduced persons of the lower rank of life into fiction. Carleton's admirable tales are all about the peasantry ; and Miss Edge worth's wit is never more brilliant than when one of her droll peasants is defending his errors. But it may here fairly be internosed that the case of the Irish fictionists, like that of Eugene Sue (as cited by the Athenaurn) shows that novels cannot tend to " the solution" of a question, and that they have a fatal ten dency to being onesided and exaggerated It may be said that the characters, whether well or ill conceived, must become mere puppets, like the mechanical creatures in Miss Mar tineau's " Illustrations of Political Economy." We appreciate the full force of the objection. But the abuse of any power does not illegiti niatise its proper use. Genius, unfortunately, is often onesided. Its temperament places it under the emotional pressure, and histories, as well as fictions, have been partial and one sided. The objection cannot apply to a catholic nature like that of Goethe taking up some " serious social question," and giving 903 vivid illustration of its phases and personifying its contending principles. In Sir Edward Lytton's "My Nonl, the varieties of per sonal ambition and of literary natures are powerfully portrayed with philosophic serenity and dramatic truth. In those parts of " Coningsby " where the manufacturing dis tricts are described, similar power is shown of employing fiction on " serious social ques tions," and many other instances might be cited. Of course for such a style of composition peculiar qualities should he required. It would demand special aptitude, and a balance between the reflective and inventive powers. We do not suppose that Mr. Dickens would have much success in such a walk. His genius is essentially sentimental, and in many quarters there is disappointment in perusing his recent works. It is felt that many of his favorite characters aro unreali ties. When " social questions" are to be taken as the background or canvas on which the novelist would employ his talents, there should be capacity for painting complex life, and a keen perception of logical relations should be united with the dramatic or vitalising power. Mr. Dickens, without detracting from his eminent qualities, does not display those united qualities. But Fielding possessed them in full mastery. So did Voltaire and Goethe ; and whether Mrs. Stowe hail assist ance or not, the works called " Uncle Tom" and " Dred" exhibit those qualities to an ex traordinary degree. To tabulate our conclusions. 1. We incline to think that the grave and reflective quali ties of the English mind, and a predominating psssion for utility, will make it worth while for professed novelists to use " serious social questions " as elements of fictitious interest. 2. We fully admit the difficulties in treating such questions in a novel; and just as in order to play Scotch or Irish characters on the stage a person must first be a good actor, so for such work an author must first be a clever fictionist as distinct from an essayist. 3 We cannot profess to say ex cathedra what further successes may be in store for the novel. It has risen prodigiously in literary value in the last half-century, supplanted the drama, influenced historical composition, and potently swayed opinion. It has to some extent given those lyrical utterances which might be looked for from ballad-writing; and, whether for good or ill, we believe that " social questions " will be copiously illustrated in the novels of the coming time. 4. Lastly, we incline to be lieve that some social questions fully admit of adaptation to purposes of fiction, but that others are entirely unmanageable. To eluci date the bounds between these fit and unfit kinds of subject-matter would occupy us too long now, and we may reserve its considera tion for another time. 1. The Senn and the Intellect. By A. Bain, M.A. London: J. W. Parker and Son. 2. The Science of Mind. By H. Hill. Ma. BAIN must not take it ill that we have so long allowed his ,book to remain unnoticed. We purposely' placed it aside, until we could spare time and space to critically examine it. The contents extend over the wide field of both physical sensation and intellectual life ; they comprise the main facts of physiology and the leading principles of mental philo sophy ; and hence it is a difficult book to be dealt with in the limits of a newspaper notice. In parts the volume is mainly compiled. It displays very considerable industry and re search. But though, in addition, Mr. Bain evinces great capacity for analytical reasoning, and is acute in his perceptions and methodical in his arrangements, yet he dues not impress us with any high sense of originative power. He enters the field of metaphysical inquiry an active husbandman to reap and bind where others before him have ploughed and sown. The plan of Mr. Bain leads him to so many divisions and subdivisions of his subject, that it would be vain to attempt to convey by de scription any adequate notion of his work. We always doubted the utility of those precise and elaborate systems of classification by which philosophers have endeavoured to table and catalogue the operations of mind. Their