The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-08-21
SEATTLE. SUNDAY. AUs. p.
THE DECLINE OF THE ENGLISH
NOVEL.

Scott. easily the first name in the annals
of English fiction. The English novel Of
sterling permanent quality may be said to
date from Fielding. who flourished about
the middle of the eighteenth century.
Between Fielding and Scott. there
was plenty of English fiction, but
nothing of permanent quality. The sixty
years that have elapsed since the death of
Scott have given US blu: two really great
names in fiction, Thackeray and George
Eliot. Thaekeray. who fed at the fount Of
Fielding, is far less original genius than
Scott, who founded an entirely new school
Of fiction. George Eliot, when at her best,
is more powerful, original and versatile
genius than Thackeray, but she was prone
to spoil some of her best work
with DEPRESSION into the world
of didactics. She is read today,
not for her didactics, which are dreary,
but for her dramatic power, her insight,
her splendid style, her pictures of homely
life and character, her fascinating humor.
AS teacher she is but fleeting figure,
but in her pure story telling artistic quail
ity she is immortal. Everybody is cap
tured with Maggie Tolliver and everybody
is bored with Daniel Deronda. George
Eliot is the best name after Scott, for she
is not more given to moralizing than
Thackeray, and her moralizing is instinct
with a sweeter and tenderer spirit than
pervades the reflective moods Of the author
of VANITY Fair"
It was a long day of barren fiction be-
tween Fielding and Scott; long day of
barren fiction between Scott and the ap-
pearance Of George Eliot and Thackeray.
and since George Eliot and Thackeray the
quality Of English fiction has rapidly
declined. Rider Haggard, the best
of his wildly sensational school, has
palled on the popular taste, and even
kipling. with far more original genius
and artistic power than Haggard. is begin
ming to grow stale; We predict for him the
fate of Bret Harte; soon ripe. soon rotten
stands for Kipling. His mine Is but a
pocket" and he has about worked it out,
lust as Bret Harte quickly worked out his
pocket" mine. whose first and best mug
get was 1.-THE Luck Of Roaring Camp"
So with Kipling; he has never given us
anything as good as his Soldiers Three"
Take Bret Harte away from his native
heath of California in the days of 40, and
he walks with an awkward and languid
stride: and so Kipling, removed from
his native heath of British India,
writes like man of superior talent but
without spark of the genius that we
discern in his Indian sketches and poems.
1t is just here that bright fellows. like
Bret Harte, Hsggard and Kipling, show
the vast distance that separates them
from a great, original master in fiction
like Walter Scott. Harte can tell admir-
ably what he has seen and part of which
lie was in California;; Haggard writes
with remarkable dramatic and picturesque
power of South Africa, where he served
as soldier. and so does Kipling of India,
but all three have committed the mistake
that the swan made when, complimented
upon her beautiful motion on the water,
she left her natural element to prove that
she was equally graceful on land. The
swans failure has passed into a proverb,
and If Haggard, Harte and Kipling had
never left their native pool the world
would not have found out what it knows
todsy-that they are not literary am
phibiaus.
The supremacy of Scott over novelists
who can only tell what they have seen and
lived lies in his fine Imagination, that en-
sbied him TO weave beautiful story out
of scenes he had never visited and con-
corning folk he had never seen. 1t is this
supreme quality of Scott that makes his
novels still more universally read than
current hction, and maintains his hold on
the dramatic stage. Scott had the Shak-
spearian faculty. He could sketch human
nature rs 1t was before he lived. as it was
while he lived, and as it Away. Will be
until time shall be no more. Toa great
brain and fine Imagination he Joined an
absolutely healthy, manly head and heart.
Ii ever a man of genius illustrated the diff
ference between sentiment which becomes
. man and sentimentality which il
characteristic of silly. shallow and false
natures, Walter Scott was that man. No
man since Shakespeare has peorled En-
glish literature with SO many immortal
figures. His fine lords and gentlemen
have had their pictures turned to the wall.
but his pictures of humble folk are as
bright and fresh and charming As if they
had been painted yesterday. His beau.
titul. flowing style. rich humor pic,ur-
esque description, and the dramatic energy
and bugle blast of his battle scenes " III
always make Scott one of the immortal.
III English literature.
There is nothing in literature that in
heroic dignity of thought and impressive
cIoquence OF language surpasses Scott:
magnificent creation, Rebecca the Jewess
save Isabella in Measure for Measure. :
How a human being, with soul a5oy,
The dudes and dolls aud social dwarfs O
nowel's fiction. can today read tina, grea
scene between Rebecca and the Temnlar
Bois-Guilhcsg, without feeling that Walte
stt was 3 magnificent painter OF heroi,
Nan nature. never 20 be outgrow n
understanding. Scott added Ne,