Arizona republican., 1896-03-03
MODERN EPISTLES.
Difference Betwe en Letter Writing
 Past and Present.
Conciseness and Brevity Now the Rule, Whereas in Times Gone By Peo- pie Wrote More for
 POsterity.

4AO ICUGOI OI UO-udy DSd1 tie or no resemblance to letter writing of other days, and MT. Andrew Lang in an interesting paper in the Illus trated London News discourses on the letter writers of the past, and says that 'the lack of good letters in modern life' is not so much from the 'lack of writers" as from the Hack of readers" and long letter, say from Australia, is perhaps never read at all, and that we have become so frivolous "a man as far away as Samoa will write note as if to friend in the next street." The pace at which we live, the rush and hurry of each day, are answerable in a measure for this change in our style of correspondence; but, above all, is it not the result of the flood of jour nalism which sweeps all before it? The letter writers of the past wrote for pos terity, it is true, but also to keep their friends in touch with the topics of the day, political and social, says London Queen. Our newspapers do. this for us to the fullest extent, and only the most private matters remain for the letter writer to record, matters of so private nature that were such letters given to posterity discreet editor would at once erase these condolences from his MS. The letter writer of to- day, unlike his predecessor, does not confde his experiences-wha form they may have taken-to his friend and correspondent; and if he has anything worth saying on any particular subject he rushes into print forthwith, into the pages of one or other of the many mag azines, or into the daily or weekly newspapers. Women are not one whit behind men in this respect, and news paper and>magazine readers are the re- cipients of their condolences, and what they have seen and done becomes at once public property.
 The admirable diction, the vigorous English, the polished periods, the tell ing epigrams in the careful and we'll thought-out essays of the day are not to be found as heretofore in private correspondence, but in magazine and journalistic literature. MT. Lang re- marks that the fear or hope" of hay ing their letters published inspired many of the old eminent hands, to do their best for fame and posterity, as well as for their correspondents. Miss Austen ''kept her wit for the world," and gave fiat gossip to the worthy, dull ladies" with whom she core. sponded. Of literary letters none ex- eel Shelly's." Scott's are simply mat ural, business-like and unpretentious;" Thackeray, though he lived in our railway days,,-' and ''should have writ ten few letters," yet for ''tone, style, wit and loving kindness" his are among the best in the world.
 The points in the notes of the day which have superseded letters are con- ciseness and brevity, to write without preamble of any kind and to go to the root of the matter at once. Formerly, if anything in the way of a request was made, suggestion as regards plan to do something, or any one of the thou sand social trifes that fill up leisure and life, it required lead of some lines to introduce it, and oftener than not an apology also. But now almost tel egraphic conciseness is the mode adopted, and aught else would read out of date; in truth, telegrams have not little to do in forming the present form of letter writing, and have taught economy in the use of words. It may be said that the letters of to-day are the direct antithesis of those of yore Then too many subjects could not be preached and commented upon; now the reverse is the rule, and to keep to one subject only, and that in the fewest words, is what society affects, hence the brief notes we all receive and write; yet, brief as they are, a clever man or talented woman conveys in a sentence or two the gist of the whole matter, epigrammatical in neatness and subtly humorous compensation small in it's way, perhaps, for the lengthy epistles of the past, but all this worka- day world has time either to write or to read