New-York tribune., 1902-12-21
Ibe Nen'Work gr1baa11ss
ILLUSTRATED SUPPLEMENT-
SUNDAY, DECEMBER H. l9o@.

rbere IS more than one moral to be drawn
from the recent quaint controversy ' ~.
RACED between Sir Edward Clarke anu MI .
,oond Gosse over the address IN WHICH 'he "
NOR ventrred to declare that English ii'ei '''-o
:! ,+ now "a rich in great writer's as IL WAS
in the golden years Of the victorian era. h
ono thing Mr. GOsse made SAD piuiuei "
protesting that because Sir Edward oiirhe 10
not q professional man or letlers he n N
.;,rI,+ 80 r.ve an opnion on books. That assump-
1ioD is on the face of it, absurd. A goou hi'
1nodern authors would are sure, be among
+bo first IN deny the hypothesis that WISDOM
d,roIIs only among the members OF their pro-
fossiop In fact there is one imaginative
,-,itar of international repute who not lohs
since in n private letter. expressed the coh-
viction that he could only hope to acconp1sh
ANYTHING III literature so long as ne reihaieu'
rs he put it. IAN amateur. that Is hi"n
working solely out Of delight in his WORK. anu
,r x,,itb the professional mans tendency to
raII into routine But what this episode SUN
further suggests, for the edihcaton OF all coif
cerncd-including editors-is that IL Is MS
take TO take man seriously just because he
bornens to have a certain position in the liter
airy sphere Mr. Gosse is an INDUSTRIOUS jour
newman of letters, and has done much excel
IL,
tbe world should be turned upside down De-
cause he happens to unDuroeh hiihseh Vi
shortSighted deliverancc-
Mr. Clement X Shorter, that great man,
wondering why the novel has ceased even 10
have Justice done to il by modern critics
indeed none Of the best critics now ever con
descend to read latter day fiction, has NIT upon
one Illuminating explanation among others'
No author. he declares. dare write except lor
Mrs Grundy": he protests that VANITY fhH
and Jane Eyre would both have been lmpoS-
sible today, and quoting the announcement of
a friend of his that he would not, under any
circumstances, publish a depressing story. he
concludes, with portentous gravity, that thiS
is all calculated to kill originality in our
voune,er writer's" In the first 2lace, of course
there are many writer's living who take
Measure, in their books, in aifronting Mrs
Grundy. and. whatever Mr. Shorters friend
NAV have TO say about it, the depressing story
so easily finds itself publisher at the present
day that very recently an elaborate protest
against this kind of work has been printed Id
an important English periodical But these
facts are neither here nor there. The salient
and absurd-point about Mr.. Shorter's plaint is
that expressed in his talk of the originality IN
our younger writer's being killed by timlo
world Of publishers. F1ddlesucks! Is IL oiisr
nality that moves some Of our younger writer's
Iaboriously to plod in the footsteps of Maupas-
sant and Zola? 1t is something, we venture 10
say, very different from originality. In nine
cases out Of ten it is the impulse OF the weak
and mediocre novelist to seek strength III
dirtiness.
That Mr. Austin Dobson's minute method IN
the study Of eighteenth century literature ana
manners has become 4 bore we have recently
had occasion TO point out in treating OF his
monograph on Samuel Richardson. 1t Is in
terestlng to see that this fact has penetrated
among his countrymen, most, if not all, OF
whom have hitherto found 1t impossible to
speak Of his writings in anything but terms or
the most fulsome praise. A reviewer in 1.-The
London Times" discussing Mr. Dobson's new
book "Side-Walk Studies" under the ttle-in
itself rebuke-of Eighteenth Century Small
Beer" is driven to admit that the sort Of gos-
sip of which this author is SO fond has been
Onp fo kpou no n