The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1851-05-15
WHOLE NO. 22S.

their duties as ceusors Of the book press. The
course OF some editors in Unfortunately putting
every book that is laid their tables, ought TO
be sternly discOuntenauced by the fraternity. IL
is even reported that some editors are in the habit
Of putting or, as the fancy may take them Of cen
surfing, books which they have scarcely taken the
/ trouble TO look into There would seem to be
some foundation for this rumor; for il does not
seem possible for one man to read carefully and
critically one-half the books which are weekly or
daily noticed by our journalists, even should he
have nothing else 10 do and at the same time
most editors have too much to do besides, il done
well to admit Of their reading at all. Here is
something radically unsound in the present edi-
torial system the papers suffer from it much,
literature more This subject shall be investi-
gated hereafter. A laudatory notice Of work net
reid, is Of course worthless In itself, though it
may put money in the purse Of the trade, and give
temporary celebrity to the writer; but at the
same time il is q cruel wrong to literature, as
much 30 as q condemnatory notice under the same
circumstances would be 10 the author and pub
Usher. The want of principle on this point is
amazing and humiisting There are but few
papers whose opinion Of a new book has much
olsim 60 respect, simply because there are so few
conductors Of periodicals. who read before they
review work. Ii is 10 be feared we have not a
few imitators of that eminent critic, DR. johnson,
who, while assuming to be the exponent Of the
csnons OF criticism, and the arbiter Of books sell
! dom read ono through.
The present system Of critical notices is dis
creditable to the periodical press Even the few
papers that pretend to be discriminating and in
dependent, occasionally defer too much in their
notices of books to the reputation Of the authors
Ii is not long since, induced by the favorable
tice Of an Eastern (religious) paper Of the first
rank distinguished for the ability aud fearless
nj nf ifa 4 ahaaa
from the pen Of respectable divine of an East
ern city. | opened the book with high expects
tions, for the theme was noble one yet, on
reading with the least possible critical alertness
at first, detected errors Of style from the very
outset, and nearly every page was marred with
literary inaccuracies, denoting objectionable
haste, il not incompetency for book-writing
The relation we are now considering Is one the
Importance Of which can hardy oe overrsted "
the periodical press have any responsibility at all
regarding the interests Of literature IL must have
a supervision of books. Bad books can never
make good literature. Let bad books be pro-
scribed by the press and we shall have good books
written. There are multtudes Of books pro-
duced whose authors seek, in preface or advertise
ment, to propitiate favor by discsiming oil pre-
tensions TO literature Very rarely such works de-
serve 10 bs, and in these cases generally the mod
esty Of the authors has done injustice to their
literary qualities. Authors are Indifferent judges
of the literary merits of their own productions,
and still less qualified are they usually to decide
that their books have other excellences sufficient
to give them q claim to existence in spite Of their
literary delinquencies. There is quite dspo-
ton, however, among book-makers, to urge this
plea, particularly among reformstory and reli-
gious writer's who seem TO be thoroughly possess
ed with the idea that treatses in the department
Of practical religion owe allegianoeeto the laws
Of literature. IL will never answer to admit q
position so disparagng to the dignity Of litera-
ture The periodical press should guard this
I point with the utmost vigilance. The religious
and secular press have joint responsibility in
mis- matter. The subject-matter Of book-its
being sacred or secular-should have no influence
in shielding il from the structures Of either class
Of journals Critically regarded, all books stand
on the same footing, as contributions to the Ma
tional Literature and il they fail in that, there
is q good reason for condemning them nor should
the sacredness Of their subjects or the benevo-
lence Of their aim, shield them from the censure
of the periodical press, both religious and secular
III they oontAlu muster worth preservaiou, thef
is the greater need of their being good hooks and
greater occasion therefore for recommitting them
to the hands of their authors wph Instructions to
recast them in the approved moulds Of literature
If the hundreds Of secular presses throughout
land were faithful to their obligations in this
particular If each paper had faithfully and ably
conducted critical department, the era Of Ameri-
can Literature would be fastened. III every paper
were required, by the sentiment of the reading
public to maintain such department, there
would be fewer papers as we'll rs fewer books,
and Literature would be doubly blessed. The
standard of editorial fitness would be far higher
than il now is, and our periodical literature would
be sensby improved. }. A.T