New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1901-06-30
THE "LTTRERY GENT"

THE LII REh1 bfN 4.
The fatal readiness of some misguided ind-
viduals 10 rush In where angels fear TO tread"
receives amusing illustration In n recent issue
Of a newspaper published not many parasangs
from the City Hall. 1t contains "A column of
complacent tittle-tattle, masquerading in the
pleasing guise of a Readers Notes" The
author thereof undertakes 10 say that THE
Academy" OF London, very properly regards
THE Golden Butterfly" as the novel by which
the late Sir Walter Besant and his collaboration
James Rice Will be longest remembered and
he follows up this blandly critical approval Of
the English Journals opinion with drolly
unconscious revelation Of the fact that he has
never even seen the book in question. \
speech attributed TO one OF the personages OF
1.-The Golden Butterfly" IN the novel itself is
actually mistaken by the author OF this screed
for a genuine speech made by n living person
under the influence Of an enthusiasm for the
book. at n date deliberately named, before n
company of the most prominent scientific and
literary men in England. The Gilead =. Beck
OF the novel is transformed into a person Of
flesh and blood. We quote the passage in
which this is Accomplished
In connection with this book II 1.-The Acad-
envy recalls rather amusing instance OF the
appreciation which The Golden Butterfly" met
with at the hands Of American shoddy mill
ionaire who had :uccessfuliy struck oil. This
individual. whose name was Gnead I. Beck, had
read THE Golden Butterfly" and had been
greatly interested by II. Coming 10 London
Ghis happened in 1870, he decided TO give his
admiration a concrete form: and. therefore.
arranged elaborate dinner for the authors OF
his favorite novel. calling It "a dinner in honor
OF science literature and art" This dinner took
place at the Langham Hotel. and was attended
not only by Messrs. Besant and Rice. but also
by Carlyle. Tennyson. Ruskin. Swinburne. Oar
win, Huxley Sir Frederick Leighton and other
men Of less note.
There is more, in n similar strain Of 'act-
ualty," and finally told that The
Academy'-whose editor will rub his eyes In
establishment IL he ever sees this article
processes to give literally exact report of
'the speech which Mr. Beck delivered TO his
guests" The speech is forthwith reproduced
Now, what 1.-THE Academy" really does is 10
reprint from page 27T OF THE Golden Butter
fly the menu card of the dinner which the
authors represent Beck as giving. and to take
from pages 292 293 the speech that they put in
Becks mouth. The Academy" does more
In short than 10 recall what 1t describes as
delightful scene in the novel. But our "Iitrery
gent has never read THE Golden Butterfly"
He does not know the predatory note in which
Il Is stated that 1.-THE Golden Butterfly which
gives a name TO this novel," was nothing more
though here fellow feeling might have warned
him. He has not even read with care the jour.
nal which he attempts TO make responsible for
his mares nest. He simply goes ahead with
the reckessness Of ignorance and talks about
Beck as though he were real person instead OF
character in a novel; makes him read the very
book in which he is himself presented; treats
the dinner In the story as though ii had actually
been given at the Langham Hotel-even men
tioning the date!-and reports the speech of
character In fiction as though It had been
spoken by n living man, before men known In
history! If he has any suspicion at all that
something is wrong, it leaves mistaken his
belief that Beck once lived and breathed and
had his being In America and london. He Is
doubtful only about the story having been "a
little decorated for English use" and proceeds
TO say, with sublime judicial gravity AT any
rate. quite certain that the speech put
Into the mouth of Mr.. Beck was not at all
1.-THE speech he made 1t smacks too much of
1.-The peculiar sort OF American dialect which
"Engiishmen invent and put into the mouths of
Americans in books. 1t reads, in fact like a bit
''of Martin Chuzzlewit'" We wonder. bv the
way If he has ever read Martin Chuzzlewit."
AS has been previously remarked by n dis
tinguished United States Senator it is a waste
OF lather to shave an ass. But the glib cocksure-
ness Of this person Is so common that we make
no excuse for commenting upon It. There are
editors who fancy that IL they put vast guam
tity of twaddle about books into their papers
written by men and women who have had no
preparation for doing intelligent literary work
the public Will be deceived into taking their
papers as organs of literary opinion" The
connection with journalism. criticism and liter
allure Of the so=called critics and literary
Journalists" they employ is about rs edifyng as
that Of the maggot with the cheese The speci
men of the tribe whose vagaries we have been
considering. when he calmly ipdorses the
opinion OF The Academy" about book he has
never seen. when he introduces his owlish