The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-03-27
English Fiction and It's Public.

Whether there are any great novels being
written by English authors in these days, and
why. if we answer the question in the mega
tive, there are not, are questions which 1t
might be imagined were already worn thread
bare by discussion. And yet there is room
for doubt if the arguments on either side have
been SO far very convincing, or If most Of the
dsputants have been fortunate in the selec-
ton OF their point Of view. Moreover, critl-
cism is hampered by the very extent and
variety OF which the art OF fiction is capable.
II was comparatively easy when sir after
was putting forth romance after romance TO
award the palm Of supremacy. Nor did the
demure young woman who sent forth pride
and Prejudice" and Emma" from a country
parsonage have many peers; although per
maps il must be admitted that Jane Austen's
own generation did not appreciate: her, and
that the Janeans, now nOurishlng literary
sect, are OF comparatively modern growth.
Even as late as the days OF Dickens and
Thackeray this matter of pre-emlnence was
comparatively plain: Bulwer or TrOllope or
Reade held each his own high place, but there
was no real question of rivalry with those
two. Since that time the public 10 which the
English novelist appeals has widened and the
demand for his work has increased; ana,
however the profits of Mr. Howelis tiet lis
saw may compare WIN those OF )ickehs'
there il no doubt of the ability Of the rank
and file of the profession TO make better
living than their predecessors did. Neyerthe-
less. with all the conditions apparently favor
able. we are unable 10 make up our minds
whether or not among the dozen living novel
lists OF high repute, there Is one whom we can
fairly number with 1.-The great ones gone
forever and ever by"
Possibly the fault may not be so much in
onr stars as in ourselves. Possibly the very
breadth and freedom OF our choice has made
il the more difficult for us 10 choose; 80 that
Greatness might pass before our eyes ana we
NOT recognize il. Certainly the attitude, even
of The intelligent portion of the public, toward
the art of fiction IS curious one. Indeed, IL
NAV be doubted if most of us really recognize
il ms an art at ALL This is one of those things
that they order dferenty-if not be.ter-in
France. There the men read fiction; they
keen i'm touch with its results aud with It's
tendencies as il it were OF as mucn cOnse-
ouence as finance and politics. the french
man NAV be narrow in respect OF not being
cosmopolitan; he may not be as familiar WIN
MIR. Hardy or Mr.. James as we are WIZ NJ.
do Maupassant or NJ. lola; Dutif his reading
be entirely patriotic 1t is at least widely n
telligent within II. boundaries. How many
Tnolishmen or Americans treat ncton-or,
Cor that matter. music or painting or Tue
drama-as vital topic OF the DAY! now
many educated men read novels OF 80 10 con-
certs. except, as it were, by accident! Ana
is not this one potent reason why our alpie-
ciation of art Of any kind is casual and too
often strikingly superfcialy Is not much OF
orr o,' fiction trivial because the novelist cannot
be sure of commanding n thoughtful public!
- saems easy TO reply 10 this question by
pointinp to the success of Robert Elsmere'
and John Ward. Preacher and 70 the
"a oerness with which the subsequent movers
| from the same hands have been awaited ana
discussed. But this1s In truth no ansWer a,
all. 1t would be hardly an e1aggerstion 70
say that these books were read. not because
they were novels, but in spite OF the fact that
they they were novels. The philosophy beneath
the fiction was bait held out TO entrap tue
s 'u,,d An item is lust gong the rounds TO
| the effect that the stories or ALBERT TOSS
have reached sale of 100000 copies. 1t
would he as logical TO conclude that this
writer represents the public taste in fiction
as to make similar claim !, for r. Mrs: Ward,
and to argue that inaecency IN a. snecllve
as philosophy.
"The photography Of MATTHEW Arnold. III
| ~ Matthew .,