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

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has superseded Comedy, because we stay at home and read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