New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-01-23
BITS or CRITICISM.

THE EVILS OF ILIOs -IliOs is perhaps the
worst arranged book that ever ime under notice
sites, Dr.. schllemann Is an astOnishinsy bad writer
We gratefully acknowledge the intensity his Of
when book, Dr. schliemann exhibits himself
most Inconsistent reAsoner and withal wordy,
unstable person who does not know his mind. We
do not ud fault with Dr. Schliemann for being
accomplished scholar or trained archaeological. He d
something better; he IL man OF real genius. No
but genus could have lived the life Dr. SchliemAnn
describes IN his autpoiogrspny keeping aw ys eefors
not been grudgng In its welcome Of Dr. 5cDliemann's
discoveries but his discoveries are thing and BIZ
book quite another IL IL necessary 10 speak quite
plainly, because the Volume has been praised
ample OF argument aud arrangement. Before we have
done with IL, We think that Dr. ecDliemann's claims "a
these merits viii BE- exploded But first we admit
that Dr. sehllemann has hardly given MIN ELF taii
ranks OF his allies and camp-followers.-lfhe Saturday
Review.
BRET HARTEs WORKs.-Au we regret il
that his most wonderful displays OF OILS peculiar talent
achieved at the cost OF excessive condensation.
When at MIS- hest his conceptions take distinct shape In
his brain He goes straight to the point OF the tale;
seldom throws IN unnecessary touches ana, resting
successfully on the most emphatic incidents leaves
much to be suggested BY the lmsgnaton Of his reader
concentrated s,udiss Of lie At the gold dsgnss. Bus
romance writer would have stood higher had be been
content to rest 10 on some halfdoEen Of his shorer
imitation N the later work though possibly in some
respects 1t is nished and recognize something
humOr. That is especially case bis drama Of the
1.-Two Men of Sandy Bar" where the kading parts arc
played by old acquantaDces who appear 10 have become
about them, while his three voume novel Of Gabriel
Conroy" tumble Of sensational incidents fnexrc'
ably crowded together We are inclined 70 pass muon
the criticism on the poems though as they arc
generally short and terse they ere almost invariably I'M
pressive.-[The London Tmes
TENNYsoN's THIRD DRAMA.-Nelther "Queen
Mary" nor The Falcon" the only two works winch
Mr. Tennyson had gwen to the stage before the produc
ton Of The Cup" at the Lyceum the other night iud
tha RIA a.
power. The harmonious lines fell agreeably enough
upon the but the story which they unfoded was nos
managed as TO make II please or arouse It's specato
Partly doubt this result was due 70 the ny
very fortunate choice OF subjects In the prcsen! n
stance Mr. Tennyson Ia happier In this respect ana ~
success In interesting his audiences correspondinfy
creased. His treatment OF ms theme Is sti ~ d
the habit OF leaving the action OF his plot
sblit for itself while he concentrates his care upon
passages of eloquent description. But he has nD9
most suggestive of effective stage tustration-by -
sionate love and scf-fVrgetful revenge-lSt Jsmcss
Gazette. 10y
Mr. swluburnes poetry really Derates and dstes !ae
Imagination IN Its dealings with external nature; ana
the mythology OF his Imagination tue powers OF nauS
noby conceived in their strangenees and theu
monster, part human, part divine. His verse -
its form possesses Of their freedom
their energy the stress or the gale, the eouno -
the tide, in He alone among living English poe
can command buowy verse forth In pursuit OF paIovy
topping. yet sustained until the appointed momett ~
accord with nne law OF the dyuamics OF nstatsA
forces No one who has yielded himself to the ineso
tion OF Mr.. swnournes poetry will 10 give IL ua
outcome OF gratitude for enlargement OF our im<tS
native llfe.-lE. DOwden IN The Academy. E