The Arkansaw traveler., 1883-12-22
True Criticism.
Philadelphia News.

It is somewhat the fashion among cer- tain classes of journalistic critics to make show of superior wisdom by decrying and disparaging everything that IS gem erally regarded as meri,orious in litera- ture, art or the dramatic world. These critics generally start out with the an- nouncement that certain actor is a pro- nounced failure, and finally sum up by admitting that he IS, of course, one of the greatest actors in the world either of this or any other time. but he would be ever so much better if he would only mold himself Tn accordance with their profound suggestions. lf they see picture which is attracting wide attention and meeting with the commepdation of the artistic world we may be sure that these superior mortals will at once proceed to show that the artist has signally failed to catch the true idea and that his work is the merest daub, and yet they will finally admit tha, there are points about it that make it, all things considered, one of the most re- markable paintings in the world. The average reader who endeavors to get at the cfitic's ideas of an actor, such for in- stance as Irving, is quite puzzled to know what conclusion to draw from the criti- cism, and as this duplex style of criticism grows in favor there are great many be- wildered people who after reading all the criticisms are obliged at last to fall back upon their own judgment. And it is no wonder that the new-fangled criticism bewllders the average reader. What would anybody think of Irving after read ing column of such stuff as this in fine print! First, that his acting as whole Is simply execrable. his manner.sms af- fected, wearisome and disgusting. his elo- eution something that should not be tole- rated by cultivated people. his concep- tions third-rate and secondhand, and tha, the only thing that makes him sue cesstul with the public IS that he has that finished and perfect actress, Miss Terry. with him. And yet, ah, saving clause T the critic goes on to say of course it will be candidly admitted that no such won- derful acting as lring's has been seen for many day that he exhibits depth md profundi,y in h;s interpretation oi characters which at once stamp him with the rank of genius. and that if II were no, for the ,rliling defects alluded to he might be regarded as one of the greatest fl no, the greatest of living actors. The theory of these would. be critics IS tha. ,hc |" rose that all are praising IS not the rose for them that IS, not unqualihcdly, although under certain circumstances II might be-
 The little fable published in the las, num- Der of the Cf2fnry IS commended 10 these wiseacres. IL tells of fool who could gain no respect from anybody until he finally hit upon the plan of disparaging everything and everybody whom other people regarded as worthy of praise II book were mentioned he turned up his nostril. al il. \ scholars attainments were secuted, an actors abilities pooh- poohed, an artists productions scoffcd at
 until finally the fool, by ,his simple and easy process, came to be regarded as a wise man before whom candidates for favor were wont 10 ;remble. Bat he re
 mained a fool nevertheless. England complains of Americas lack of ability ;o criticise, and no wonder, because the most Of our criticisms are merely attempts to eXhibi, the wsnderful learning of the critic, and not to intelligenily set forth the merits and demerits of the person cri,i. cised. We will after awhile learn ,ha, true criticism IS .very different from aii this, and when we reach ,ha, pom, when we can calmly and candidIy contemplate an actor, picture, a literary production with an intelligent desire to genuinely reach the true measure of their merit. the art or science of criticism will be incal- culably advanced in this country although the individual critic may not have the same opportunities of airing his own learning as he has at present