The times., 1899-02-23
..Tbe American ImmOrtaIs."

.The American ImmOrtais.
Literature" has an interesting scheme
afoot. 1t proposes that the readers of to-
day shall decide by ballot what American
writer's of today shall be immortal. Per-
hans there is reason TO doubt the critical
Judgment of future generations, but 1t IS
not clear how the establishment oil an
Academy of American Immortais VIII
confer undying fame on its members.
That the works of many of the proposed
oternais will not be read even by the next
generation. We have much cause TO nope.
Being ignorant of the writings oil these
authors. the future may be willing 10 ac-
cept the verdict of today that they are
great On nc. other theory can we assume
that the judgment of those whose votes
..Iiterature'' gives will be respected.
That the American Academy must be
grateful institution 10 all who are fortu-
nate enough to become members we can
readily understand. They write not only
for bread, but also for Immortality we
assume this. because some OF the most in
dustrious would starve to death il they
were forced to write for living. By rally
ing their admirers and polling votes
enough TO place them among the ten who
are to be charter members OF the proposed
academy. they enjoy the distinction OF be-
ing classed with Shakespeare, Milton, and
other enduring writers while they are still
alive. For. unfortunately, il is not re-
uuired of an author that he shall die in
ann tai
II cannot be said that the reading world
has taken a very excited interest in the
scheme. important as 1t seems. only
seventy of the readers of Literature
have responded to its appeal for an
opinion as to what persons should consti-
tute the ten charter members. 1t must
occur to the conservative mind that any
period which can produce ten living
writer's who are entitled to have their
names go laundering down the ages must
be extraordinary. 1t is doubtful If Amer
lea is richer at this time in the stuff that
commands eternal admiration than was
the Elizabethan era; yet but for the COM
paratiye youth of English literature not
nine of Shakespeare's contemporaries
could have found readers today. Some
seventy of the subscribers TO Literature
have no hesitation in naming thirty three
writers of immortal genius, beginning
with Mr. Howells. who receives seven bal
lots, one more than John Fiske and Mark
Twain and two more than Thomas Bailey
AIdrich 1t is something new to think OF
Mr. Howels as immortal. When it is said
that he writes nothings with amazing
pains and has depicted few typical char
acters with skill, the judgment of his own
day is expressed. Why John Fiske should
live in letters is a question for a board OF
enquiry. Mark Twain has been the
humorist Of his day, and he deserves all
that a man can who makes a melancholy
race laugh. His claims are surely superior
to those of the two who have been named.
Mr. Aldrich has shown an uncommon taste
and skill in poetry, and is perhaps the best
Of all our short story writer's. But it is a
thankless task TO pass in brief review the
writers of the day, without space for care
full criticism. If there is to be an "Acad-
emy of American Immortals,' Mark
Twain and Mr.. Aldrich should rank with
the first ten. So should Bret Harte, who,
with Charles Dudley Warner. receives
four votes. as does DR.. Weir Mitchell, also
"a writer who is fortunate in his subjects
and popular but who is lacking in art
The authors who receive two votes each
Henry James alone having three-are Ca
BILE, John Burroughs, Henry Van Dyke,
Stockton, Donald G. Mitchell, and Stod-
dard. Those having one vote are Bronson
Howard 1.-THE playwright, Bliss Carman
Owen Wister Margaret Deland, Paul
Leicester Ford, Captain Mahan, Riley
Stedman, Lodge Henry NJ. Alden (editor
! of Harper's Magazine), Mrs. Phelps Ward
Richard Harding Davis, Henry b. Fuller
Mrs. Slosson, Joel Chandler Harris, John
| c. Van Dyck, Henry E. Krehbiel, and Laf-
cadio Hearn.