New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-10-10
MIR. FREDERIC HARRISON.
A DISCIPLE OF COMrE on TIE CHOICE OF
BOOKS

on large paper II is always pleasant to praise
an intelligent effort toward good book-ma<ins
but this is not one which can be praised without
reserve. 1t is printed on paper which IS 100
glossy and translucent and the ink is pae-the
latter frequent fault in these days and fatal TO
the beauty or lcgibty OF any book. In an edi-
ton meant 10 be luxurious. It is the more mex
crIsable The issue ordinary paper is pref
tier book and more readable one, simply because
the ink is blacker. The most commcn1able thing
about the present volume Is the binding OF IT.
Edges untouched by the shears and cover In
dark blue buclIam lettercd in lower case may
well attract the buyer who likes the outside OF
his book TO he tasteful
But what is Mr. Frederic Harrison doing in
the masquerade of large PAPER and buctram
covers? Such vanitics are for the dictionaries
or at the very most for the bibliophc for him
who loves a book as a book. They arc for the
collector and MIR Frederic Harrison has taken up
his parable against the collector in the essay
which gives a title TO the volume. The collector
whom he has singled out TO seImoniZe Is more
particularly the collector of rare books. but II Is
only too evident that for collectors of any species
Mr. Harrison has little liberation. Listen to this
tremendous diatribe against the harmless en-
thrsiast:
collecting rmc books and forgotten authors is,
|
foolish in our day Rare books now are by
the nature Of the case worthless books and their
rarity usually consists in this. that the printer
made blundcr in the text, or that they contain
somethin- exceptionally nasty or silly.
Bibliomana sczes hold of rational bein,s and
SO pcrNcIts them that in the sufferers MIMI the
human race exists for the sake Of the books. ana
not the books for the sake OF the human race
. To the collector and sometimes 10 the schol-
ar the book becomes a fetch or IDOL am Is
worthy Of the worship Of mankind, even IL IL DC
not NJ thp slightest TO ANYBODY.
II is obvious that the author Of such passage
MS that can have but little INDULGENCE for poor
creatures who for books On lar-e paper. or
for bindincs or for any Of the material qualities
which give value TO a volume Yet here he is.
to say the least a consenting party TO the pub
LEGATION Of his own book i'm a form meant TO tempt
the very class whom the book condemns AMI
ridiculcs. | wonder which he thinks likely to
prove more Potent his preaching or his teaching
by example the sin AGAINST which he breaches
Mr. Frederic Harrison is a very accomplished
student and writer who looks out uptn the world
through the spectaclcs bcqucathcd to him by NJ
Aueustc Comte. lie is a pOsitiyist That IS the
same thing Is sayins that he IS philosopher
of n certain kind Comte was thinker OF great
powers who carried To the extreme folbie com
mon 10 Frcnchmcn-thc belief that this universe
and the problems that arise in it can be reduced
/
far as TO call him eIotcsque old French pedant
rcdant he was I; whether grOtespuc or not IS "a
matter Of opinion. or PERHAPS of taste lie has.
however a small band Of followers in Enclan
who hold him and his doctrines i'm the same KIND
of reverence that a Puritan Of the Seventeenth
century had for the Hebrew prophets Of the Ola
Testament 1t is a reverence not less profound
possibly not more discriminating. a wit has De
fined positi, ism MS Roman Catholicism minus
Christianity The principle of authority IS There
fine doctrine Of infalhblity. whether there Is
doctrine or not. reveals itself pretty frequently
in practice The "Coms dc lmlosope POSI-
tive is appealed to by Mr.. Harrison or Mr. Con
creve-the latter now n Disscnticnt POsitiN ist-
much as an Ultramontane settles disputed auoS-
tions by reference 10 the syllabus
Whether Comte is the true author Of Mr. liar
ris,n's In lex Expur-atorls Of rare boolI, | know
not lie is. at any rate. the author OF heatIse
on rcadinr which his disciple eXpounds in his
present essay. The library Of Augrste Contc, he
tells us in an end note forms the basis Of the
whole Of this essay. Such a Tr,te would perhaps
have been more scrViccab,c at the BEGINNING
II is con, enicnt to know whom one is reading AM
the Enelishman American may form diner
cnt estimates Of judgments on English books ac
cordingy as they are the judgments or French
man like COmtc or OF an Engshnan Ike MI
Frederic Harrison Two of Mr. Ilan sOns-or Of
Comics ?-chicf heroes are Goldsmith and Scott.
OF Scott he declares one need us little speak Us
of Shakespeare, and lie proceeds to speak OF HIM
through many RACES i'll tone Of hyperbole which
is perhaIs the effect OF reaction AGAINST the neg
lect into which Scott had at one time fallen MIR
IIai1dson's panegyric on "Ihe Vicar Of Wake
Geldr-criticism it is not-shows even less bal
ance of Judgment than his rancsyric Scott.
! - is
mortal masterpiece Of creative art lie ranks
if above all the examples which he selects the
best Of modern French fiction II is above Vic
for Hngo's Notre Dame" and Los Miserables y;
above Balzac's Perc Goriot" and Eugene
Grandet": above George Sands Consueo"
and La Mare aux DiabIes"; above eau
tiers "Capitaine Fracasse"; above Du
mass "Vingt Aus Apres." Some of these
selections are themselves odd as selections
of MASTERPIECES of these several authors. But Mr..
Harrison tells us it would to him seem treason
AGAINST art to rank even the best of them with
The Vicar of Wakefield" This is of the judg
ments which Mr.. Matthew Arnold calls sangrcnus
Presently. however, il appears that Mr. Harrison
has very strong views about French fiction. lie
tells us that the wonderful powers of Hugo, Sand,
Bahac, Merimcc, Gauticr and Dumas are I'M
happily counerbalanced by the defects of their
qualities Docs he mean that the result is nil?
The French novel OF to-day fares still worse at
his hanls 1t is, he declares. intensely smart
and diabolically ingenious, but, though read by
all Europe, no one enjoys it. To be addicted to
il is a vice to manufacture ii is a crime. They
are not books. these things to imbbe this com
Mound is not to read. And so Flaubert and the
de Goncourts and lola and Daudct and Others
whose literary powers are the admiration OF Eu'
rope are dismissed as unworthy OF anything but
contcmptuous invectiNe.
Dir. Harrisons mistake is in judging books by
the impression they make on his own mind and
in not Judging them by their conformity or want
Of conformity to established principles OF criticism
lie too often tells us Throughout this volume that
he likes this book and does not like that lie
believes this thing and does not believe that. lie