New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-12-30
AMERICAN LITERATURE.
p1cuiRDsON,S SECOND VOLUME.

RICHARDSON'S SECOND NOAOguH'
RIchardson. Vol. II. American Poetry ahc
r,ctl"n. $40. PIP. 4o6. q. T. Putnams sons'
Mr. Richardson wrote an Introduction to his
frat volume, published two years ago. IN winch
no explained his method. What he proposed 10
himself was n critical, not merely eAposioory'
study or history of American literature; ana oy
criticism he meant impartial analysis ana the
formation of estimates upon acknowedeco ruies'
unaffected by any extraneous CONSIDERATIONS
In having down his scheme Mr.. Richardson did not
-, a moment blink the difficulties inherent in
;, he faced and stated them fairly. The only
consideration not dealt with by him was the
.rnnort.n, one whether, the difficulties being such
ss he rer.entcd them II was prudent CT advis-
,hIe N oreceed with an enterprise 80 exposed
IN misconstruction, and possibly open TO the
charce of being premature. An author who mas
resolved 10 write . book Is, however, naturally
AZ the mitch Of resolution, and perhaps 1t wouid
ho less than reasonable to require that he should
taks into consideration objections to the whole
cnterorise. which, II allowed their due weight
might deprive il of justification. In this case
such objections were at all events passed over
AND notwithst anding all the drawbacks the scheme
has been carried out to the end
II will be necessary to state some of the diff
entities before examining the second moiety OF
the work. Mr. Richardson thought lbut could
not DO certain that the time had come to put
American literature upon what may tc called
a scientific basis; " to consider it, as he put IT,
sM calmly as we would consider the literature
Of another country, and under the same hmlta-
tions of perspective coroary of this PROPOSE
ton is the question:" Why should writings which
would have passed into obscurity in England be
magnifed beyond their deserts, merely because
course. there are several quite obvious answers
60 this inquiry though whether they are sufficient
answers is another matter. Certainly it must be
admitted that the critical standard of Europe
cannot be adopted by us without sacrifices.
Those sacrifices Mr. Richardson is entirely ready
20 make, and they bring him TO the conclusion
that for practical that is, CRITICAL purposes, there
WAS no American literature until about eighty
years ago. This involves a great wrench, and a
concession in national or provincial vanity cal
culated to be unpleasant to many. But the most
important consequence Of the position, so far
as the critic is concerned, is this, that it makes
nearly all criticism of American htera-
ture too near to be trustworthy. The
judgments delivered upon contemporaries, or
even upon immediate predecessors, are notori-
ously apt to be reversed In this case the new
critical method confines analysis virtually TO
contemporaneous writers; and that is to say the
least embarrassing and may be thought by some
TO be a sufficient reason for not undertaking an
enterprise of the kind.
Mr.. Richardson, indeed, has ~ done his spirit
ing gently" He cannot be accused Of harsh
dealing with the living writers who are passed
under his microscope 1t is only justice to him
20 say that his endeavor to be Just is conspcu-
ously apparent from first to last and that where
he falls short of justice his personal limitations,
and not his intentions, are presumably respon-
sble. In the main, his plan is good one,
but it develops one quite serious fault when
put in operation. This is the necessity of treat
ing twice over the works Of those who have
written both prose and verse. Thus there is
in the first volume chapter upon Emerson
q prose writer, and in the second Emerson as
poet is considered. The effect is not little
confusing, and it interferes with the apprehen-
sion of the authors conclusions. The first volume
dealt with the beginnings of American literature,
and aimed az just estimate of those seventeenth
and eighteenth century writers who, during the
colonial period and for some time later. were the
sole producers in the literary field The general
estimate could not but be depreciatory. The
point of view taken by the critic was this We
can afford to be self-respecting 1t is the
new city, the shoddy family, the growing liter
ature that is self-assertive. Hawthorne, Elmer
son, Longfellow, Motley are all well able TO
take care of their regulations The de-
velopment Of llawthornes genius is to be studied
as impartially as we study Dante and in the
same quiet way. And let us not give to John
Norton, Samuel Penhallow, or Mather Byles
or Robert Calef, or Nathaniel Morton, or Per-
cival, or Mrs. Sigourney, time and thought which
baln IN ufnro and
this principle the inquiry carried out, and
now we have the completion of it in a volume
occupied with the poets and the novests
In criticism Of the poets Of the century Mr.
Richardson seldom travels far from the paths
already marked out by public opinion. In the
case Of Poe he is, perhaps rather too eulogstic,
and despite an effort 10 overcome it, he seems
to yield somewhat unduly TO that Fictitious Euro
pean estimate which is so rarely valuable be-
cause it is so rarely based upon comprehen-
sive knowledge of the literature criticised When
for instance, Victor Hugo said that Poe was
the prince Of American literature the statement
possessed no significance, for Victor Hugo had no
knowledge of American literature, and was con-
sequently incapable Of estimating Poe's relation
20 it. Most European judgments Of American
literary men have been, until quite recently, open
TO the same criticism, though they have been
unduly deferred TO in this country by force of
habit and persistent provincialism. Poes poetry,
moreover is not that upon which his continental
fame rests. France knows him mainly by his
Gales, and it is the bizarrerie Of them that has
commended them to Partisan critics and readers
In the same way Mr.. Richardson appears to have
followed European opinion in unduly deprecating
Longfellow, though when a critic deliberately pre-
fers Hiawatha' to Evangeline" we must be
prepared for some singular intellectual excursions
The chapter Emerson as Poet" on the
other hand strikes us as sound and apprecia-
tive piece Of criticism, discriminating and re-
strained and in some particulars strikingly per-
ceptive. We may instance especially the re-
marks upon Enerson's poem "Brahmao the