The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-01-11

Bel, OhTlyle, Dhlube-DbuNe, anu
Matthew Arnold, who are nothing il not
critical, but who at the same time have
shown that critical ssgacity may rank among
the finest expressions of original genius. 1t
would be ridiculous to suppose that either of
the men we have named is not greater lite
rary power than Mr.. Disraeli.
But, admitting the fact of "failure," we do
not see the force or Mr. Disraelis sarcasm.
The objection TO most critics is that they
have not practically handled the matters they
judge. They know nothing of the technical
difficulties which the artist has to overcome
Thackeray failed as painter; but as a critic
of pictures he was within the scope of his
sympathies, an admirable Judge. Sainte-
Beuve may be said TO have failed as poet
and novelist; but as the most delicate
genial, tolerant, and appreciative critic of
poems and novels, nobody now questions his
ability or integrity. The objection TO un-
successful romancers, poets, painters, sculp.
tors, and musical composers, considered as
critics, cannot be that they are not intellec-
tually prepared for their business; but that
failure has so embittered their minds that
their judgments will necessarily be the judg-
ments of envy and malice.
AS far as i'll success in any special pursuit
utterly corrupts the moral nature of a man,
and turns him into a moral assassin, this
objection is valid; but it is notorious that the
highest reverence for genius and the subtlest
perception of its felicities of execution are
often seen in persons who, originally mis-
taking aspiration for inspiration, have at last
subsided into intelligent and genial interpre-
ters of works they could not hope to rival as
creators. In Germany and France such per-
sons are more common than in England and
the United Ststes but both in England and
the United States they are more common than
is supposed. They are often overlooked,
misunderstood, or decried, simply because
they have an artistic horror of the perversion
of artistic genius to the production of mere
sensational effects. Knowing, as they do,
how cheap and vulgar are the contrivances
by which great artists can astonish
the crowd into unintelligent admiration
of mere tours de force, they have no
hesitation in assailing eminent singers and
composers when they cheaper and vulgarize
art in order to make money. They are de-
nounced as being jealous of superior repu-
tations, when they are really jealous only of
the cause of art itself, compromised by the
greed of its most prominent exponents.
They are sufficiently acquainted with the
technicalities of the special art in which they
have "failed" to know that the persons who
have succeeded frequently condescend to
tricks which they as critics both understand
and despise. They do not deny the genius OF
the artist: they simply stigmatize that perver-
sion of his gifts by which he consents to sac
rifce art in order to get more notoriety and
money for himself
What specially enrages this class of cri.
tics is that England and the United States are
relatively deficient in artistic perception, and
are, at the same time, the two countries in
which artists descending to the level of Cali
fornian gold-seekers, hope ''to make theu
pile" Art is therefore apt to be vulgarized
in fba fun nafinDc yvhara for as
money is concerned, be best remunerated
Jenny Lind was undoubtedly great singer
| but when she inconsiderately sold herself tc
| Barnum she vulgariZed musical genius. Nc
man or woman who had 'failed" in getting
prominence as a singer was guilty of the
charge of being envious jealous, and malig
nant in denouncing her triumphal progres;
through the United States, as a triumph OF
humbug, pure and undefled. Barnum glo
ried in making merchandise out of her very
! virtues. In every ten-dollar ticket he sold
he made the purchaser understand that onl
four dollars were charged for the wonderfu Il
voice; the remaining six dollars were cyni
cally exacted for her sweetness aud goodness
of character.
AS long as any art, whether it be the art by
which Mr.. Disraeli constructed 'Lothair, OF
the art by which spectators in musical repu
tations puff the celebrities they have il
charge, we trust the ''failures" in hteratur,
and music will prosecute their useful busi
ness of criticism. A few of them may b
prompted by malignant feelings; but it i
easy to cast them scornfully aside as not be
longing to the critical but the crimina
classes. The remainder, whom we fully be
lieve to constitute nine-tenths of the genera
body, will, we hope, uphold the grand lead
ing principles of art against charlatanism il
every form, especially in that form in whic
it is most pernicious; the form, namely,
assumes when genius lends itself to "th
ways that are dark and the tricks that ar
vain" of business speculation.