The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-10-06
LITERARY MEN AND WOMEN.

LITERARY MEN AND WOMEN.
In a recent article treatingo of the rela-
tive intellectual positions of educated
men and women, Mr.. Maurice Thomp-
son is led, by his evident desire to give
men the precedence, into some unfair
criticisms of women's literary work. He
disagrees with T. w. Higginson's opin-
ion that women are the chief cOnserva-
tors of literature in America, and that
the Americans who do serious work In
the study of literature are generally
women, and then acknowledges that the
most striking difference in the work of
mems and wOmen's literary clubs is that
the former are distinguished by
thorough Americanism in the selec-
ton of subjects and methods of discus
sion, and the latter by a propensity to
delve into the past. This assertion,
even if correct, hardly proves the
point the writer endeavors to
make, since preference for
modern and current literature, even of
the best, over the ancient classics e
not indicate superior intellectually.
What it goes to show is that women are
less deeply interested in the topics and
problems of the day than are men. So
far as this tendency is to be judged by
club work, there is doubtless some foun-
dation for the comment, but Mr.. Thomp-
son is certainly aware that women, indi-
~vidually, keep pace with current
literature, essays, fiction, philosophy,
etc., not less than the statesmen, the
lawyers, the business men he tells us
about. Has not his friend Mr.. Howells
declared that the novel is written for
the girl of the periOd7 And whether
Mr.. Higginson or Mr.. Thompson is right
in his view of the relative Importance of
women's work, women ought not to COM
plain, since both agree that it is impOr-
tant.
But, in spite of his concessions, the
accomplished ex-president of the West
ern Association of Writers is not en-
tirely free from the ancient notion that
women are unable to take a broad and
comprehensive view of life that quail
fies them for general literary work. AS
an illustration, he says:
1t is a singular fact that in q column of
personals edited. by an American
corning what Lord or Lady SO-and-so is
doing. or what has happened to Millionaire
This-Or-that; rarely do they refer to n
literary, q scientific. or an artistic person
or event. On the contrary, If the column
of personals is prepared by a man, the lords
and ladies. the milliOnaires and the merely
notorious folk give place to those who have
attained some intellectual eminence. OF
who have won the right tby some worthy
achievementl to be accounted noteworthy.
If the PERSONAL columns were men,
toned on which he bases this amazing
generalization it would probably be
found that they were prepared for GER
tain classes of readers supposed to be
especially interested in the facts given,
and that they in no wise disclosed the
individual tastes of the writer's. More
over it is likely to be the case that some
of the columns referring to scientific,
artistic or literary persons were prepared
by women under impersonal editorial
guise.
But the most serious of Mr.. ThOmp-
sons charges is that relating to the
writing of indecent fiction. He quotes
Mr.. Higginson as saying that it is women,
not men, whose publishers try to exc out
the claims of their books by limiting that
they are a little indecent, and supple
ments this by adding that "amOng note
worthy American male authors / do not
recall one who has cared to venture as far
as two or three of our women into this
feld.n This is obviously disingenuOus.
Does he know of n noteworthy" Amer
lean female author who has ventured
into this field at all? If so, he rates GER
tain indelicate yOungpersOns much high
er than does the general public. But
both he and HigginsOn are wrong in
their statements. Mr.. Thompson will
discover, when he engages in his new
duties of book reviewer of q newspaper,
that quite as many impure novels are
written by men as by women, and
that they go quite as far, and further, in
their grossness. He will find. too, that
while in almost every case the female
authors of such books are very young
women, whose crudity of style and idea
betrays their own Ignorance of what
they are writing about, and the enormity
of their o~ffense, the male writers are
mature men, with sufficient knowledge
and experience of the world to measure
precisely the effect of such books, and
to know how far they may venture with
safety.
1t is a matter, after all, of no great
moment whether women or men are the
more earnest and profound students, or
which does the best literary work, since
literature is not governed by sex; but it
must be said that the advocate of mas
culine superiority does not make his
case.
THE New England Magazine for October
contains an article by Edward Everett