The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-07-22
THE AUGUST MAGAZINES.
.rHR GALAXY.v

and its Adulterations,' by John c. Drsper
"Once, by Mary l. Ritter; Diplomatic In
cidents,' by Thurlow Weed; Diana" by
Howard Glyndon; sister Diana" by w. A.
Thompson; Edward Bulwer. Lord Lytton,"
by Justin Mccarthy; The Story of
Mutiny," by James Franklin Fits; 'How
Napoleon Managed a Theatre; The Dumb
Poet by Margaret J. Preston; "The Vacci-
nation Question" by Frank P. Foster
''Lenore," by S. S. c., The Styles of Dis
raeI and Of Dickens, by Richard Grant
White; ''The Galaxy Miscellany" Drift
wood, by Philip Quilibet; Literature and
Art;" Memoranda by Mark Twain;
''Nebulaa, by the Editor.
The following summing up we take from
Justin McCarthy's article on Edward Bal
wer, Lord Lytton:'-
Thus then, using with ineyhaustible energy
and perseverance mis- wonderful gifts intel
lectlal mechanician, Edward Bulwer-Lytton
went on from 1928 TO 1860 grinding out OF his
mill an almost unbroken succession of novels
and romances to suit all changes in public taste.
I DO not believe he changed his themes aud
WAYS Of treating them purposely to suit the
changes Of public taste; but rather that, being a
man Of no true original and creative power, his
style and bis views were modified by the modi-
fying conditions of successive years. Some new
a.
question Of human life, came up, and it attracted
him who was always a close and diligent stu
dent of the world and its fashions; and he made
it into romance. Whatever new schools
OF fiction came into existence, Bulwer-
Lytton, always directing the new ideas into
the channel where popular and elementary
sympathies flowed freely, succeeded in turning
each change TO advantage, and keeping his
place. Dickens sprang up and founded a
school; and yet Buwer-Lytton held his own.
Thackeray arose and established a new school,
and Bulwer-Lytton, whom no human being
would have thought OF comparing with either
as a man of genius, did not lose a reader.
Charlotte Bronte came like shadow aud so
departed; George Eliot gave new lift and life
10 romance the realistic school was followed by
the sensational school; the Literature of Adult
terry ran its vulgar course-aud Bulwer-LyttOn
remained where he always had been, and
moulted no feather. II is not likely that any
true critic ever thought very highly of him, or
indeed took him quite seriously: but for many,
many years criticism which had so scoifed
and girded at him once, had only civil words
and applauding smiles for him. How
OF "Bullwig," and more lately how
Thackeray praised him Charles Dickens
what an enthusiastic admirer of the genius of
his friend Lytton he too became And Tenuy-
son-what fierce passage of arms that was long
ago between Bulwer aud him; and now what
cordial mutual admiration. Fonblanque and
Forster, the ithenGuno and Punch, Tray,
Blanche, and Sweetheart-how they all well
coined in chorus each new effort of genius by
the great romancist who was once the stock
butt OF all lively satirists. How did this happy
dealing at the hands OF the critics than Bulwer
when his powers were really most fresh and
forcible; nobody ever had more general
and genial commentator than shone
of late years around his sunny way.
How was this Did the critics
really find that they had been mistaken and own
themselves conquered by his transcendent merit?
Did ne win the wise who frowned before to
i1o at last N nNtn IIn
showed that he was not TO be written down; that
no critical article could snuff him out; that he
really had some stuff in him and plenty of
mettle and perseverance; and he soon became
literary institution, an accomplished fact which
criticism could not help recognizing. But there
was much more than this operating towards
Bulwer-Lytton's reconciliation with criticism
He became a wealthy man, man OF fashion,
sort OF arstocrat, with yet sincere love for the
society of authors and artists, with taste for
encouraging private theatricas and endowing
literary institutions aud with a splendid coqn-
try house. He became genial, golden link be-
tween literature and society. Even Bohemia
was enabled by his liberal and courteous good
will 10 penetrate sometimes into the regions of
BelgraVia. The critics began to fall in love
with him. / do not believe that Lord
Lytton made himself thus agreeable to his
literary brethren out OF any motive what
ever but that of honest goodfellowship and
kindness. have heard too many instances of
his frank and brothery rieudliness to utterly ob-
scure writer's, who could be of no sort of service
to him or to anybody, not to feel satisfied of his
unselfsh good-nature and his thorough loyalty
to that which ought TO be the esprit de corps of
the literary profession. But it is certain that
he thus converted enemies into friends, and
stole the gall out of many an inkstand, and the
poison from many penman's feathered dart.
Not that the critics simply sold their birthright
of bitterness for an invitation to dinner or the
kindly smile of literary Peer. But you can
not, suppose, deal very rigidly with the works
of man who is uniformly kind to you who
brings you into sort of society which other
wise you would probably never have u chance
of seeing who being himself lord, treats you,
poor critic as friend and brother; and whose
works, moreover, are certain to have a great
public success, no matter what you say or leave
unsad. The temptation to look for and dis
cover merit IN such books is strong indeed
perhaps too strong for frail critical ma
Iure. Thus arises the great sin of English
criticism. 1t is certainly not venal
II is hardly ever malign. Mere ill-nature, or inn
patience or the human delight of showing ones
strength may often induce a London critic &c
author; but although we who write books arc
each and all Of as delighted to persuade our
selves that any disparaging criticism must be
the result of some personal hatred, cannot re-
member ever having had serious reason to be-
lieve that London critic had attacked booE
because of his personal ill-will to the author
The sin is quite of another kinda tendency t
praise the books of certain authors merely
because the critic knows the men so intimately
and likes them well that he is at once naturally
pTejudiced in their favor, and dsinclined to Say
anything which could hurt or injure them
Thus of late criticism has had hardly any
thing to say of Lord Lytton, except in the wal
of praise. He is the head and patron, and Orna
ment OF great London literary ring" / us
this word because none other could so well con
Vey to reader in New York clear idea of tn
friendly professional unity of the coterie desir
to describe; but ] wish it to be distinctly under
hat I do off ihta