The Portland daily press., 1881-01-28
saturday Review.J
Shall Dumas Have a Statue?

There is something about Dumas as a novel.
ist which reminds one of the famous definition
of the philosopher, Second best in every
thing" He is not great ..rtist in words, and
yet his description and the like are always up
to their mark; he is not cunning analytic
character drawer, and yet his readers always
feel that men and women, and not lay figures,
are occupying their attention. He is frequent
ly outrageous in his contempt of regular plot,
yet the interest of all his best works-save on
ly "Monte Cristo''-is sufficient to carry the
reader on swimmingly to the end ,!and the best
plotter in the world can do no more. As to
his dialogue. it is perhaps hardly second best.
In its kind it is quite perfect, and the only
fault is that there is little too much Of it.
The characters do not lombard each other
with astounding epigram like the characters of
Moliere and Congreve; yet they are not often
dull. They are not learned or philosophical,
but they have plenty of mother-wit, which is
much more to the purpose. Even when one
has been finding fault with the separate ingre-
dients of the books, it suddenly strikes one
that the total effect could not be hetter OF its
kind. If you want other kinds you must go
elsewhere. But il you want this kind, there is
none like it.
People used to find fault with Dumas as be-
ing improper" but fortunately his chief ira
ducers have taken good care to wipe off that
ty years in France, the flecks in Dumas's books
never very serious ones, really require a micro
scope to enable one to discern them at all.
Therefore, all we can say is that, If the ques-
ton, Shall Alexander Dumas have a statue?
be one to which England has any right to re-
ply, England should certainly reply Yes. The
great Alexandra had few little prejudices
about us and he made US run away from his
invincibe musketeers in a manner which is in
doubtful accordance with the facts of history.
But perhaps because the facts Of history rath-
er reverse the representation, we have no diff
ficulty in forgiving him for this. His country
men may, if they like, talk about his son be-
ing his best work. On this side the Channel
there is not much danger of the joke being
echoed. Far be it from us to speak disre-
spectfully of a very clever and very witty
writer. But, with all respect to the Alexan-
Dire of to-day, he is not fit to hold candle to
his father either as dramatist or a novelist.
As there can be no comparison between "Les
Trois Mousquetaires" and "La Dame aux
Perles, so there is none between "Mlle de
Belle-lsle" and "L'Etrangere." The novels
certainly have stood the test of time, and il is
difficult to believe that at least some of them
will not continue to stand it. For they are in
the main dependent on things which are of
perennial interest to the fighting loving, trav-
elling, adventurous animal called man. There
is not, we think, much danger that anybody
for very long time to come will look at the
Dumas statue and ask the question fatal to
the claim of existence of statues-'Alexandre
Dumhs? and who was he?" Now, with the
utmost Difference to NJ. Zola, we do think it
possible that this might happen before a great
many centuries are past inthe csseof NJ, de
Goncourt.