The morning call., 1890-09-08
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..

The death of Alexandra Chatrian is not
an irreparabe loss to French literature,
though the Erckman-C hatrian series OF nov
els have had large circulation in their day
But it is the final dissolution of a literary
partnership which is one of the most curious
episodes in the history of letters.
Over forty years ago two young men with
literary ambition hit upon the singular idea
of combining forces and writing books.
which were partly the composition OF the
one and partly Of the other. They were
Emile Erckman and Alexandra Chatrian.
They borrowed their idea from the fashion
which prevails in French dramatic litera-
ture. In Paris, plays generally purport
to be the joint work of two or more
playwrightS; the fact being that the
piece is generally written by one and is
| retouched by another, whose standing en-
| ables him to secure its production. Thus,
| quite number Of Scribe's plays first saw
| the light under an alleged dual paternity.
| Duman0is, Dennery, Dumas the elder, and
others in like manner gave their names as
joint authors of pieces to which they had
contributed little ii anything. In or.NNN}sSs
language similar example of joins, ann,a,.t
ship is afforded by the plays 1o,ifse the play
and Fletcher, though in t. :, baI.ncad i,
wrights were eaInpasalently el4 : :
many-sided ability; in cur own time, Mr..
1Dorcicault has occasionally figured on the
play-bi!l- as the senior mem Der OF a firm of
dramatic authors.
There are few examples of literary partner
ship in English or American fiction.
Charles Reade wrote Foul Play" in part
nership with Dion Boucicault and Collins
and Dickens published some short stories
Under their joint names. Tie most notable
instance in English EATERS of firm of
uoye writers is tl,c "arlnership which ex-
listed tn-.tG' or nrts s tiiiffs ,;etween " alter
, Jesant and James Rice. This firm was emf
nently successful, but the works which Mr..
Besant has published since its dissolution
show that be was the master mind in the
concern.
There is something so incongruous in the
association OF two or more men to produce a
work Of Imagination that critics have Iabored
to show what portion of such works be-
longed to each author. Thus we are told
that such and such parts of the Erckman-
Chatrian series belol ged to Erckman. and
such others to Chatrian; what Besant con-
trlbuted to the. BeSant-Rice novels, and
what was the share of Rice. This division
OIL The honors probably rests on conjecture.
In every work OF fiction there are two parts,
the plot, and L edetail of its evolution, includ-
ing the delineation Of character, and the dia-
logue. Il is quite easy to understand that
these two shares may be allotted to two
minds; that man may be skillful in work.
ing out an imbrogiio, without being cana
BILE of composing a bright dialogue, while
another can write brilliant dialogue. and
sketch character admirably, without being
able TO build the scaffold of story. Wjkie
Collins IN his day could devise a plot that
held the readers attention from the firstpaee
to The last. but his dialogue was tame; while
Rhoda Broughton's dialogue flashes with
brilliancy, but the denouemento of her stories
is evident in the first chapter Its quite
likely that most literary firms which have
produced joint novels have divided the work
on some such lines as these.