The Arkansaw traveler., 1885-01-31
THE rRADK or WRITING.

'2S34oN anu 0u448&4& t28n W nav OyWk besn-that interest h the inky trade has greatly tncreased. And a all wriears have 70 deai with pahisAszs sAs ss- lssion between them. aud the experience they have of one anosAee, witA the hahils and peculiarities of earh, naturally COZ { era the two classes. and tAe concsza ea- lends Co laymen In general q great deal of curiosity, if nothing elso. is telt about manuscTipt-making and maAu. scxipt-makeEs, and puhlishexs come in for their share.
 It was said long ago that authcs and
 ahlishers are natural enemies. have
 hen l. ought that, if they were dot, they ought to be; and yet | am we'll aware that tt fault is net all on one side. They frequently fail to uI derstand one anotheT naturally enough, because authors are, as a rule, 1np,a-tical, and publishers are practical 90 sery practical cs'en as to consider their own benefit exclusively. The for yer complain that unfair advan- tage is taken of them by the latter, who deciare in turn that the former have 90 much vanity, and co little common sense. that no business man can ket along with tAem. While thefe are nun ,bealess ex captions, both the charges are measus- ably true. ltis inevita ble that esch class should have grievances against the other. but there is no reasen why so many of these grievances should he 50 we'll based is there wwfe moi effos ssT wroaS, CT beth, on each side, the discord and antagoaism would steadily diminish aud t b Qnes. doaable whether there be any aiminution. Having always followed the usotsssion Of . writer in . wide sense, embraeing journalism in every department, maRa- xine-conuihuting and book-making, 1 have been invited to furnish . seriss of papers containing my views and con. clusions concerping this branch of in- dustry. especially its advansagea and disadvantages. ] shall speak of writers in their general import, more of writers tor newspapers and magazines than of authors strctly, because those comprise large body, are nearer the people, and because their methods and occupations are probably less familiar. Having been an editor repeatedly, know, inasmuch as editors usually represent publishers, how writers are reg arded and treated by them, though l may say that. in any position ] have held. my sympathies have always been with writers. These belong to my guild, and have tried through lite to light their battles as my own. remember dozens of conflicts have had with publishers because un- willing to disregard the rights of my brothers of the pen, and remember, too, that in nearly all of them, ! have bean victorious. If editors who have been writers would no, so actively side with publishers, and eagerly relinquish the attitude they once held, writess would fare better than they do now. It is an unpleasant thought; but 1t is unquestion. ably true, that many writers who have been oppressed, afkcr they are pat in positions where they should see Justice done, really lend themselves to oppres- sion. This is particularly true in journ- alism. Men who nave invsish ss sEs:Ss: publishers, and with entire justice, no sooner find 1t their interest to serve them than they carry their serv,ces beyond the domain ot duty or equity.
 The influence of journalism often seems pernicious. Many who aspire to permanent and desirable places in 1t, and reach them after long and hard struggles, begin, when fairly seated, to discourage and throw obstacles in the way of others trying to climb up. Instead of sympa. thizlng with and lending helping hand to those below, as they should, recalling their own experience, they ridiculs and censure them, and do what they can to push them down. Such examples are only too com mon in all professions and employments bat they appear more conspicuous and more unnatural among writers, because they ought, from their very calling, to be less selfish and narrow than the mass of humanity. And then, as they arc forever commenting on the weaknesses and faults Of their iellows, it seems as if they should have fewer faults themselves. Happily, there are writers and writers, notably among journalists, with whom there is an exceeding variety fos better and for worse.
 The objection most frequently made to writers by publishers, or their represeuts- tives, is, l repeat, that they lack common sense, and have such excess of self. ap- pteciasioa ss to be very hard to deal with. They are charged also with want of punctuality and trustworthinsss, with irritabiiity, unreasonableness, capsieious- ness, and dives idioyncrasies thas can not be fathomed, and t they could be. arc not worth fathoming. } They are called visionary, impsovident. ungrass- ful, and nearly all their troubles atts1b- uted directly to themselves. ] have heard publishess tell again and again of the efforts they had made to asssst and be4riend written how constantly they failed through no fsuit of theirs, sad how, at Last they uawittingiy turned those they tried to bsne6t, isto downright enc mics Writers are often accused of ai. tecting eccsntricity, hoping thereby to get the reputation Of gsnInsss. Ths clsv- eses they arc, the wosss they ara, 1t is said, to do busipess with, and the more they presume. Brilliant fsliows gre fre- qusntly the svsrsion of publishers, who assert that their mental gifts are apt to be counterbalanced by some mosal d. 6cisacy.
 Magsz;ns editors, maay as least, are Akr k.lG