The recorder. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1802-1803, 1803-06-15
FROM TEz VIRGINIA ARGUS OF oc-
TO8ER 10Th, 1901.

THERE is net, perhaps, Ia the
pFsient age, any one ipecies of literary
competition, that invites luctl univcrial
attention as novels; and this popular
svidicy. oy,A natural oonfcquence, has
produced an uncommon multitude of
competitors in the marker of bookbuild-
ing, q few celebrated names, however,
ftand forward before tho ret; and while the
world is iatiarcd with 20 many hiltorics
OF kings and ninilters, of patriots, and
uiurpers, very smutihg narrative nalght
De compiled of the rife and progrcfs
of the writers of novels. OF the degrees
Oh their merir, and the diverfity of
st1clr talents
But this fubjca is TOO comprehensive
to be c3mprifcd within the column of q
newspaper; AMI hrACe, the reader can, in
the prs tcnt 'Httauce, expect nothing more
lhan afsv 3raDdenr remarks. IN this haify
ikeich, hsll COMING tnyicIf to writers
in tho Englilh language, that I may NOT
fay TOO litrles by attempting to lay toe
mitch.
The names Of Rich2rliion, Fielding,
and Smoilet, are familiar 60 every FEEDER
OF novels. th!sincompaIabie t!iuuvi-
rsts began thcir career much about
the fame time, thar is to lsy, about
the year s74o. This date is nos cxaGt,
bur 1t is cutie as much 70 IS appears ne
esEary ior the Prefcnt outline. Rich
sfdion was By protection a printer, and
had nor the advantage OF cladical c1u-
cation. Pamela was his frlt produc-
zion and from the perulal of few
pages, and tie ultimate dcfertion of thc
pubic, Preiuhae that it is but YER
poor lhing. Fielding, who was iult
then beginning his Eirf regular novel,
JoiePh. Andrews, has, in that piece,
Gait ineer upo, oamela; and, On the
other hand Richardiou declared that, II
he had not known Henry Fielding, he
would have conje6tured thac Ioleph
Andrews was written by az bofIer. Ga
yifia was the fecoEd and grcatef, Grar-
difon the ralrd ard lslt of Richardfon $
novels. This author poGened the mott
abiolnte and profound knowledge of hu.
man nature and the mott rgranaicsI
dominion over the icnlibility OF the read
or. Bur rhen he requires rwclye pages
70 tell you what he might have f3id
much better in four. He is prolix and
diifaiige TO an exceis, which Woold be
.niuiFerable in almolt any writer
! but hlnieh. Lovelacc is one Of the
mott perfectly finiihed characters tha,
| ever was drawn and this may be re-
| garded as his matter piece. We art,
at once, compelled TO admire and TO
detett; but ghc latter 1enlation alway,
oyerpowera she former, till the hero Is
! finally abioFbest "a The villain. In Gran
| dilon, Mis- Charlotte feems, by FAR, tbs.
molf LIVELY and jnecretting perlonage.
| Rlchardlon Is remarkably yigilanr in he
! moral tendency OF his novels.
Fielding was icholar.In pai1inc from,
Claril1a to }ofeph Andrews and Tom
Jones, the di(tinetion Is, at once, dif-
cernlplc. Richardfon was capable o.
correct merriment; bur his fayouritt
file was the tender, the ferrous anc
! tablimcs On the other hand, it has
been juRlY remarked of Henry Fielding
that he never feems 10 happy as when
he frs down with the reader at the
kitchen fircdde Of an aichoufe. lie
was fond Of fociability, and offport,
Bul when the iubje8 demanded the
compadion Of the reader, yielding well
uDderltood how to BURT upon him in a
torrent of tenderness. Witnels the ad-
narable epilode ofNancy nAhlerl which
IN unmarried young man ought to
read Ten times over.
SmoIlet was as dilinGt from both of
gheic writer's, as they are from each