Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1890-04-19
WRITING AS A TRADE.
cts Not Such q Bonanza AS Some
Are Lod to Believe.
Common -Scnse Comments by DIR. Edward
Eggieston-Of All the Learned Profess
slons Literature Certainly Is the
Most Poorly Paid.

Tho phenomenal sales Of many recent
books, notably such as General Wallace's
"Ben Hur" and Mr.. Bcllamys Looking
Backward" have led the general public
% believe that the business Of author
hip must be profitable one. This i'm
preston has been intensified by reports
II tho great prices paid certain writer's
for their productions. Examples in point
arc tho handsome incomes attributed to
Mark Twain, w. D. IIowclls, Mrs. Bur-
nett and others of far less note. Consc-
luently tho recent statement ascribcd
TO DR.. Edward Eggloston, himself sue
sessful writer, in disproof Of this opinion
has been received with surprise. Dr.
Eggloston, according to n literary jour
nal, holds that there Is not n single
American author who really makes an
income out of his books. Grub street
has become tradition, but tho rewards
H the book-maker continue painfully
mail. Dr. Eggleston writes to Globe
Democrat correspondent in reputation
u tho bald statement thus attributed to
him, but in rciteration OF the poor fnan-
hal returns Of authorship: "Of course
! did not say any thing so prcpostcr-
,us as tho words attributed to mo
N the newspaper in point. This is
only ono of many illustrations Of tho
,rying defect Of American journalism
Vt this time. Moro brains, more pre-
;ision, more mental training are want
I'd In tho reporters work or enter
?rising reporters there are enough, men
who will find out tho secrets of the
North Pole, steal an interview with the
popc or tho Car, or penetrate in search
" news to lady's bcdchambor. But
decent report Of public assembly, or
IF an address for which the orator did
aot himself supply the manuscript copy,
have not seen in long timo. wish
20 flo q general caveat that | am ac-
'ountable for no speeches put into my
mouth in this way. What l did say be-
lore Congressional committee was that
did not know any author who he'd ac-
quired a competence by literary work
properly so-called. I proceeded to cx-
sludo school-books. Mr.. Longfellow
Vas professor and made good invest
nents. Mr.. Emerson was poor during
,hc greater part of his life, believe.
though he endured tho drudgery of
lyceum lecturing, and it is said nc only
rained competence in old age by good
Investments. Hawthorne was driven
rich and to seek public offices. Mr..
Lowell has had other sources of income:
Mr.. Howells has had, let us hope,
liberal editorial salary; Colonel IIiggin-
son published successful school-book.
My very point is that authors arc
irivcn from tho production of liter
lturc, properly so-callcd,' to drudscry
T sonsationalism by tho desire to
,arn that suflicicncy which literature
loes not give. The newspaper in point
nay or may not in it's critical moments
;lass tho profitable Juveniles of Miss AL
soft, Mr.. Trowbridgo and Oliver Optic
nth literature properly so-callcd. 1T is
matter OF opinion. Mr.. Aldrich's adj
mirable Story of Bad Boy which I
should call literature without question
mark, did not reach the tenth part of
tho circulation attained by Boston
Juveniles Of "a films Ter texture.
Lot mo remark, arl combating the
notion very prevalent among Congress-
men that an author of reputation has
,pcned bonanza OF all the learned
professions, literature is tho most poor
ly paid. Tho leading authors must DO
compared with loading lawyers, doctors
and minister's. II you compare sue
:essful author with o country lawyer or
Tho pastor OF q village church, you might
mako fair showing. But what author
aver hopes to attain the income enjoyed,
say, by the latc DR.. Willard Parker or
by Mr.. Evarts? Tho body of working
itternteurs who mako pot-boilcrs for
the booksellers all their lives and are
never known to the newspapers in such
. discussion AS this, certainly have no
hope Of moro than tho livelihood Of
very humble professional man.
''For many years have been accus-
somed to warn young men of from be-
ginning q literary career. because SO
low Of the literary workers ever attain
competency"