New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-07-14
FRENCH NOVELISTS.
SOME SOLID CRITICISM.
ESSAYS on rRENcH NovELIsrs. ny eeorgc saints.

ESSAYS ON FRENCH NOVELISrS. by George Saints
bury. 12mo PIP. AGO. Charles scrbners sons.
Mr. Salntsbury's essays French novelists follow
no system and prescLs no connected view. They are
Indeed marked by omissions OF sometimes surprising
character while OF the authors chosen for review
are accorded consequence by no means )us'lneu oy
their standing in literature. The volume opens with
survey Of The Present State of the french NOVEL;
which was written in 1885, and at that time was
rather behind the actual situation Mr. salnISouiy
takes as his the supremacy in French hctoh Oh
naturalism. All that he says on this was true ten OF
even five years ago. But prior to the date Of his essay
reaction against naturaiism had begun TO set Ill., ara
has been Strengthening ever since. II may DC CON
coded that IL has hitherto produced no shining lights
and no masterpieces and that its work Is by no means
accomplished But whoever undertakes survey Oh
the present state of French fiction IS certainly uhue
obligations to take this movement into account, anu
further 10 acknowledge that its existence Is symptom
of literary convalescence. Not only has reaction set
in against the naturasm of Zola but the change III
rudes what was called the psychological novel; ana IL
is and more tending to reviFa Oh ING ronihuo
as illustrated by Hugo The fact Is that thc era Oh uc
@decadents" has already passed away. The STRAIN Oh
that nose was perhaps too much for the young men
who invented it. At all events, the whole " fin de
siecleD business has proved evanescent and In inc
advent Of twentieth century, spirit it Is not un-
cult to discern a saner and healthier departure.
Mr. samtsbury however, is entirely Justified III MS
protest against The curiosy perverse misluosmen'
which has sienalized the lowest stage OF French
fiction by Wanting it's most morbid products as superior
10 English fiction The latter is no doubt In anything D'
fourishing condition, nearly all the masters OF te u
century having passed away, while no new ones nave
arisen to take their place. But English hcuoh lor
fiction in English has at least steered clear Oh inc
pseudorealism which had effects disastrous upon
Gallo literature, and if il has refused TO ABANDON .o
romantic elements, its judgment here promises !" 10
indicated by the new French school now rising i"to
notice and activity A few unwise English and Amen-
ko,.o yoe4pn
state of public opinion in Engshsptaking countries
which precludes the free u'c Of Zoiaisuc mc'ho'S'
This however should be regarded as fresh lnusui'7
ton of the saying that evil communications coruPV
good manners for most Of the complaining
themselves proved repeatedly that it is poSsoie 10
produce very good fiction indeed without the ledSV
nastiness Apart from the question OF NaturailSm
Il would hardly be contended that recent French icoh
was peculiarly artistic. As regards the pSycAoiogy
Of IT, nneenths is no more really psychoiogcH IMAM
II is mathematical. What passes for psychoogy IN
this order Of fiction is an artificial ana lhpo9s'oe
creature Of fancy and il is only by begging the whole
question that such inventions are assumed 10 cor
respond to the actual processes OF uie hui"n iiu'
The people who pausc at every moment 10 nave long
arguments and contentious with themselves; WHO
discuss every step they take in all its bearings VINO
anayze the souls Of their friends ar quite I'M
nossble They could not exist outside the pages OF
novel. A..
is nj war with Nature, and that 20 be thoroughly
.rtet,c a thing must be as thoroughly unnatural.
without stopping argue that point we may Suggest
,h.+ econ dcpends for its success upon hitting the
taste Of the MANY and that all experience proves the
taste OF the many to include an insstance upon
naturalness OF course author may turn up DIS
nose at the public, and declare that he writes only
for posterity but even in that he never can KNOW
that posterty will appreciate his work. md he mas Only
the rather cold comfort Of feeling that he has been
successful in avoiding popularity with his contem-
poraries Mr. Saintsbury has no sympathy WIN inc
authors who rere AnslOSaxon Intolerance OF zoiaism
IN fiction and he is we think equally SOUND IN DIS
answer to the critics who pretend that English hcuon
has failed IN the representation of passion - OWE
he saws that have little sympathy with TINS tax.
That as 10 passion is the merest confusion between
passion itself and certain actions which are sometimes
the expression of passion and sometimes not' Ihere
IS Of passion itself more in page, nay, IN para
rTaph of Esmond," than in all French fiction, save
iSManon Iescautp ala Nouvele Heloise," and ala
Norto Amoureuse' awhile unable to agree
with Mr. santsbury his choice Of exceptions, which
appear TO us singulary infelcous, we hold him to be
quite right on the main point
The "apprccationso in this volume arc twelve In
number namely, Anthony Hamilton, Alain Rene
Iesage Study of Scnsbility Charles de BERNARD,
Alexandra Dumas Theophile Gautier, jules Sandeau,
octave Feuillet Henry Neurger, and VicorCherlue2
large proportion Of the space is occupied by trlls-
lations and it must lie said that if these are his own
Nor in fact does he as a styist The reader may look
10 him for sretd analysis for generally sound jndg-
ment and for a rather positive than lucid EXPRESSION
But he not the gift of graceful, or moving or
musical style. He is heavy, cumbrous and not seldom
dull and this Notwithstanding the vlrly ana
severity of his criticism. His essay called " Study
OF sensibility" is case directly in point. III uis
paper he examines the French literary ana social
movement Of the eighteenth century Now, to zeal WIN
that movement at all penetratngy very subtle and
lie chs dpmaudpd
ing this the era so-caled OF sensibty," will surely
he presented as one Of unmltigated artfcality and
hcartless though solemn mimcry of genuine emotions
Mr. santsbury does not indeed 60 so far as this but
he fails to seize the character of the time and as
he describes it unprepared modern reader Is at
all likely to understand the Of the authors OF
the time, moreover, Mr.. SaintsbuTy gives somewhat
unsatisfactory account. Madame de La Faycttes
0Irinccsse de CleveS," and Marvonx's "Vle de
Marianne would almost appear from his description 10
he too dull for reading at The present day Ot1F
critics have certainly not found them On the whole
however, this essay is very good Introduction 10 cse
period if it is not exactly enticing.
The essay on Faubert strikes us as being one OF
the best. 1t is mainly defence of the author OF
Madame Bovary and this defence is at bold and
skilful The criticism of Salammbo' Is especially
,ornA and that of the authors later works which
were so summary condemned at the tine Of their issue
may Induce some people to read those volumes once
more Alexandre Dumas is treated with cordial
sympathy and admiration which is in refreshing con
trast TO the sneerlng depreciation Of the new land
crudc) school of criticism. Mr.. santsbury. as he
frankly avows is not sQueamlsh. despite his hearty dis
onproval of Naurallsm He admres Gauter, and
does not conceal his liking for Madeaine de Manpicr.
But his strongest sympathies flow for the International
writers, the true lovers OF beauty and nature the
dealers in simple action and the odfahioned straight
forward love; and these he discourses upon in his
solid way to edhcatlon. Solid. indeed, is the word
for this critic. He is much in earnest. lie has
mastered his subject thoroughly. lie has broad and
healthy views. lie is in many ways preemlnentiy
British but not Phlisne Only he lacks lghtness Of
form and as before observed. there is in some Of his
views here put forward certain air Of beatcdness
which Is the fault Of circumstances.