The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1882-07-02

tedious fustion 10 which ho nj last accustomed
us. but which We find positively nauseous in
tho case OF Wilkic COLLINS or OF Anthony Troll
lopo. Tho trick to which we refer Is tho waet-
ing OF printers ink in such roputitions as tho
following; Should no write 70 Laura 2
No. he would not write to Laura. Should
he write TO Laura. tho danger was wero
he not. on tho other hand. TO write TO Laura. il
might happen. &c. &C. Prof. Ward Acknowl-
edges that future generations may bo porricx-
ed and irrltated by the munnerisms which WI
fOrgave In consideration of many exconnces.
and maj. wish that what is an element hardly
s'larnbio from any OF Dckens's compositions
were away from them rs one wishes away from
his signature that horrible flourish which IN
ms iottors, ho som0timcs represents himself
Among tho clements on which the effect Of n
hhoyflists work must. apart from style and
is one Of tho most gniicant and the present
biographer coniesses that in this Dickens was
IN the earlier period OF his authorship very far
thinks to the accident TINT he began his liter
airy career as writer OF sketches. but in u still
those other masters Of fiction with whom he was
especially faml liar. AS regards structure. he
had also to contend against special difficulty
weekly or monthly numbers There is no doubt
however that his constructive skill improved
IT. In later lifs under the nigeneo Of Mkie Col
and The Mystery Of Edwin" brood. ~ 0'''''
Many diverse opinions have been expressed
the noyelist's art which we call charaeteriza-
tion. Prof. Ward maintains that, within his
own range. Dickens is unapproached. and that
even the range OF his characters cannot justly
be termed narrow when compared with that
cS e., by amy other great English novel
list except Scott. Neither does the biographer
assent to the condemnation which pronounces
all his female characters more or less feeble
or artificial. though he acknowledges that
m "a
thea Casaubon than he could have drawn
Romoa herself. Heroes or heroines of mag
unanimous type representatives of n generous
effort in great cause, are not to be met with
in his writings, and he never even essayed the
picture Of an artist devoted to art for its own
sake, His men and women and the passions
and desires that agitate. them. he has usually
chosen to depict on that background Of domes;;
thus it was that, he laid a firm grasp
on the vast public which, vibrates very
differently from mere, class or section
see of life and its brevity and the world and its
varieties, the more we know that no exercise
it to the great ocean Of humanity in which we
are drors-and not to by-ponds VERY stagnant
here and there-ever can or ever will lay the
foundation OF an endurable retrospect. The
types Of character which in his fctons he
chiefly delights in reproducing are. according,
comparing with tho realities around US.
His pictures Of middc-cass life are nu;
meroas and effective but the humor , and
OF all to hts descriptive power. Prof. Ward de-
murs to the common assertion that Dickens
could not draw gentleman. and protests that
Mr.. Twemlow and Sir Leicester DedlOck are
well bred persons. He admits. however, that
Dickens was, as II rule, far less successful when
trying to describe the manners of the so-caled
higher classes The failure should be ascribed
partly to the fact that Dickens at no period OF
his life saw much OF what is called society
and partly to tho existence in his nature of u
vein of rebellion against the existing social
system so that he usually approached n de-
scription OF the members Of its dominant or
ders with IA satirical intention, or ut least an
undertone of bitterness.
Prof. Ward well distinguishes the browning
service rendered by Charles Dickens to his
kind by reminding us that all the powers of this
remarkable genius were consecrated to reveal
ing the infinite multitude of as ociations
which binds men together and makes us mem
bcrs one Of anothcr. Yet, though observation
and imagination might discern these liSa-
human heart with humanity could alone
Strength eng Of life. He Extraordinarily con adj
dressed himself. rs to the task OF his exist
ence, to the endeavor to knit humanity togeth-
er. The method which he by instinct rather
than by choice pursued was that Of seeking to
show the good in everything. In his advocacy
OF the poor. tho helpless, the outcast he Is Of
ten tempted into IL rhetoric too loud and shrlll
into a satire neither fine nor fair. But his
purpose" concludes the boSrapher. was
worthy Of his powers. nor IL there recorded
among the lives OF English men of letters any
more single minded in its aim. and more sue
ccssful in the pursuit Of it, than his"