New-York tribune., 1900-01-14
Gbe Nem'Oork Gribmore,
SUNDAY, JANUARY IA, 1900.
ILLUSTRATED SUPPLEMENT

"Sylvanus Urban" in the current "COrnhin'
writes playfully about THE New Criticism
Three of its exemplars, DR. Dowden. Mr.. GOsse
and Mr.. Samuel Butler, are deftly impaled upon
his pen But the best thing in the essay comes
at the beginning, thus: "One charm of the New
Year is that it brings the new books. Few peo-
pie notwithstanding literary affectatiOn to the
contrary are really so coxcombical as To prefer
old books when new are to be had" The writer
of that honest remark is wise in his generation
To repeat with pride the old boast when
new book comes out 1 read an old one," is, we
fear, to utter something very like cant Ihere
is gusto, an enthusiasm says our "COrnhllf
sage with which the mind throws itself upon
the new work that the old, however reverently
esteemed cannot inspire" The enthusiasm
NAV be shabbily rewarded. But that is not
the point 1t is not for what we are to receive
that we are grateful in the presence OF DooK
fallen fresh from the press, though there Is
certain emotion of intellectual anticipation IN
volved in the moment. 1t is something which
touches the intellect only partially; it Is a
peculiar sensation, springing from the sense
of strangeness, of newness, of the smell of
new paper, ink and binding, which we do not
pretend accurately to define.
Mr. Kegan Paul the English publisher who
has lust published book of Memories, is OF
the oDinion that literature is not in itself
profession" He is sorry for the young author
who has nothing to fall back upon" Wherein
he disagrees with Sir Walter Besant who thinks
that one may make very good living out OF
letters Mr. Paul tells drOll story of royal
gentleman. presumably the Prince of Wales,
asking several eminent professional men about
their incomes. The surgeon said he made about
f25OOO Sir John Millais put his yearly earn
ings at possibly f35000 and when the Prince
expressed surprise the artist went on, some
what nettled: We'll sir Il matter of fact,
last year | made 100000, and might have made
more had l not been taking holiday longer
than usual in Scotland" Browning and
Matthew Arnold were present The former
put his arm through ArnOld's and Mr.. Paurs
and said 1--WE don't make that by literature, do
We" TennySOn, according to Mr.. Paul, was
"a thorough man of business, and our final
parting at the end of one of our periods OF
agreement that we as publishers and he
as author took different view of his pecuniary
value" The passage is eloquent in more ways
than one. 1t plays beautifully into Sir Walter
Besant's hands, and might be put parable
In the columns of THE Author" But after
all, this whole question of the rewards of au-
thorShip is rich in amusement for the diSin-
terested observer When all is said and done,
when all the laws have been revised and all
the forms of contract have been designed, Fate
steps in and decides in her inscrutabe way
whether literature shall pay not.
A familiar fallacy relating to that convenient
figure of the Imagination, The Man in the
Street" is quietly exposed by Mr.. Andrew
Lang. The Man in the Street" the average
uninstructed, unettered uncritcal individual
for whom it is useless to write good books or
to paint good pictures, is the fruit, we are told
of democracy. He is not as Il matter of fact
Mr. Lang protests, in the least democratic
type; he comes from no particular social
stratum He may be prince a duke; he
may be a haberdashers assistant curate or
Il stakeholder, n journalist" The thing is
obvious. And Mr. LangS simple statement has
in it little unspoken sermon. 1t reminds us
all that a love of literature has nothing to do
with classes. We put the blame for the
growth of cheap journalism and trashy fiction
on the shoulders of the lower classes (again
so conveniently, but the worst harm is done by