The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1891-05-30
THE IDEAL IN LITERATURE.

first literature of the world was, with
few exceptions, poetic in form as we'll
as in spirit. The feeling of the earliest
writer's, and of those who composed be-
fore the invention of alphabets, was
that there should be between meaning
and expression correspondence more
intimate and complete than any that
could be convened in direct, unmcasured
speech. We call the feeling an instinct
because it existed before the growth of
tradition and the formation OF schools.
1t was, therefore, natural and just
meeting n want of human nature as
music does. Homer was artistic and in
artificial. The rules which he followed
in the construction of his lines were i'm
posed upon him by his own sense of
their appropriateness to his subject mat
ter They fashioned Il fit organ for epic
song. and it was his poetic genius that
he knew when he had caught the proper
pitch of his lofty theme.
man may have poetic feeling, he
may share all the poets Joy in the pres
ence of beauty and subliinity. without
this fine aesthetic power, this subtle tact
in the selection of form; but, though in
that case he may enjoy the poetry of
1t is the sense of form. not mere emo
tional susceptibility, that distinguishes
the artist from other men. 1t is mani
fest that the ancient prose writers also
had this peculiar sense. They. too, were
artists. though they exercised a large
liberty in the matter of form. Ancient
orations were strictly literary compo-
sitions. and they were constructed with
measured periods and often with an I'M
mistaka bic rhythm.
Ancient historians avoided the evil
dcnce of passion which the orators be-
trayed i'll cadence, and which would
have been out of keeping in judicial
review of public annals: but they never
thcless recognized and availcd them
selves of the advantage of artistic form.
The works of Thucydidcs. Livy and
Tacitus suggest in the charm of their
symmetry and in the majesty of their
mass the architectural effect Of an old
Greek temple. Those authors had the
most lively appreciation of arrangement,
fitness and proportion-an ideal always
in mind. determining the choice of every
word, the place of every detail, and the
order of the whole narrative.
1t is common TO speak of poetic license,
but poetry is by nature thing under
restraint 1t has no license to sacrifice
the form which is essential to the pres
crvation of it's spirit. But the obliga-
ton of that observance was plainly felt
by all the ancient classical writer's of
prose as we'll as of poetry 1t followed
that they were especially devoted to the
cult of the ideal. The perfection of
hn; e l.
jccts They could not condcsccnd TO an
intimate treatment of things below the
level of lofty style. Consequently
they transmitted to us modern ira
ditions and conventions against which
we revolt in our desire TO leave nothing
intrenched by the point of the pen.
The war between the classical and
romantic schools was, however. not pre-
ciscly along that line. 1t was not for
scientific accuracy and thoroughncss
that the romanticsts broke away from
the academic restraints of the old school
1t was rather because they had con-
ccivad new and holder forms of artistic
expression. better adapted. as they
believed, to 'embody the thought and
feeling of their time. Their ideal was
no longer the Creek temple. but the
Gothic cathedral. Realism, on the
other hand is comparatively indifferent
to demands of art. 1t is concerned with
the actual. not with the ideal. II would
portray the truth, not as it exists for
ever in the abstract. but as it is pre-
Scntcd with an intcrniXturc of error
and uglincSs i'm the facts of life. The
Greeks were decent even in the nude;
the modern rcalist is often scandalous
in full dress. This results sometimes.
perhaps, from mistaken conception of
the proper province of the literary art
list. and sometimes from an incXcusab bic
attempt To pandcr to IL pruricnt taste. 4
work which is officially impure can not
be purely aesthetic.
Science, of course has its claims; but
the man of letters can not plead the ex-
actions of science i'll defense of Il work
of literature. Let the rcalist. if he will
not or can not exercise the due modcr;l-
ton and reserve of fine art, say once
for all. Il am not an artist; ! am only !,
pathologist. and have no subject but
disease" Then his books might he
justly classified and literature would
he under no conpulsion to apologize for
their existence. But even the rcalists
affect style They are not willing TO
admit they write badly On the con
trary, they insist that they have intro
duced an improved style-familiar, hut
not coarsc--morc fluent than the stately
march of classic prose, more natural
than the verbose rhetoric OF the roman
ticists. There is. no doubt, Il degree of
truth 10 this boast. The anciomts did
- 1;,t.
take too much. But we can not regret
II - "a