New-York tribune., 1883-03-18
TIE CASE or MR. ROWELLS.

If an American explorer were to return
to his native country about tins time,
from some unknown land so savage and remote
as to be out of the reach Of The TRIBUNE and
similar chronicles Of events and opinions, aud
were to look in current newspapers for traces
of the most important movements i'll ltera-
ture, art, and morals, he might imagine the
| country to be In revolt against two maSn
prctenders, whose books are at once an afiront
| to American intelligence and a danger to
American letters. These mischevous and un-
principled persons are Mr.. Henry James and
Mr.. William ID. IIowels. They have been
| writing novels for several years, and the world
appears to have been trcked into supposing
that they wrote very well. AT any rate peo-
pie have been glad to read their stories, and
publishers to pay for them; and foreign critics
have recognized them as the principal repre-
sentatives of n new school of fiction, distin-
guished by certain fine and fresh qualities in
which contemporary English nOvelists are almost
universally deficient Only a few months ago
this was the general opinion Of American
journalists also. We looked upon James and
Howels as a credit TO our country, and since
Americans have a pleasant habit of apprOpri-
atng the credit of the country TO themselves
individually, and assuming II generous pcrsO-
nal share in the celebrity of Niagara
Falls tie cOmmOn-sChool system, General
| Grant, American humOr, the climate Of
California, Saddle Rock oysters, and Boston
novels, we applauded these young men for
showing the Old World what we could do in the
way of English composition when we thOught
it worth while. This is the way we looked at
! & I,,t IL, L.
the tone of the press has changed. There is
hardly anything too severe to say Of these
successful nOvelists now.
| With regard to Mr.. James perhaps the case
| is not quite so queer. There has always been
a party hostile to him in the American press,
an American literary clique auSrily refusing
| to accept him as an American novelist, owing
| TO an uncomfortable doubt whether he
J had any desire for patriotic fellowship. The
present outbreak against Mr.. James is the ex-
| tension of an old grievance rather than the
| discovery of new one. He has given no
| fresh cause of offence. He has not recently
| depicted the American abroad with lbeOus
| fidelity to facts which is spoken of as cyn-
| cism, and that provoking indifference to pOpu-
larity which some of us relieve our minds by
calling snobbsh and if he Is denounced just
now with more fervOr than usual, it is because
he has been keeping bad company. The favor
and friendship of Mr.. Howels seem to be re-
| garded as the crowning outrage for which Mr..
James is not to be forgiven. The clamor
against Mr.. Howells is so sudden, so violently
in contrast with the praises lately lavished
upon him, SO grotesquely improper when we
consider the amiability of his character and
the cheerful, genial, unaffected tone Of his
writings, that the dispassionate observer is both
puzzled by it and amused. What has he done
all at once Is Mr.. James to be cast forth be-
cause Mr.. Howells praises him, and Mr.. How
| ellis at the same time to be laid
| under the ban because he praises Mr..