The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-09-30
EMILE lola.

The change of opinion, even among strict
est moralists, regarding lola and his work,
has been great since his first series of
a sensation. 1t was assumed hastily by
critics and readers who were shocked at
the bald and hideous presentations of vice
and crime and misery that the author was
one Of the perverts whose taste for foul
ness led him to wish others to have a
knowledge of il. But more deliberate judg-
ment led them to see that he had a saner.
sounder purpose; that he was not portray
ing the under side of life with intent to
disseminate a knowledge of uncleanness be-
cause OF liking for uncleanness, but be-
cause he had high moral motive in thus
calling the attention of the world to evil
conditions over which a veil was ordinarily
kept carefully drawn. 1t was seen that
his treatment of his theme was not that of
one who loved grossness and impurity, but
that of a photographer who pictured with
exactness what he saw. His portrayals of
vice do not make vice inviting, but quite
the reverse. The panoramas he unrolls
show the utmost responsiveness of 1t and
an outcome inevitable as fate. He is
classed as a realist of realists, an estimate
that is true within limitations. For though
he portrayed what he saw and knew, ne
did not see all. 1t is impossible that human
ity at its lowest should be so hopeless,
so lacking I'm all the better instincts, so de-
void OF all the gentler, sweeter elements
as he painted it. Even the vicious and de-
graded have their lighter moments, their
wholesome interests. But lola had not the
insight to perceive these nor the magma
ton to enter into them. He saw only the
degradation and misery without their occa-
sional mitigations. He was seriously in
tent upon the one thing; he lacked a sense
of proportion and was wholly wanting in
the sense of humor which puts man in
touch with his fellow-creatures in their
brightest moods. Thus, in spreading out
the dregs of life before the world he left
them blacker than they need have been.
Undoubtedly he made great impression
upon mis- time-an impression OF force, of
earnestness, even of genius. Those who
question the wisdom of his methods, the
soundness of his ethics cannot deny his
| intellectual strength or the power of the
personality speaking through his work.
His exact place In literature is yet to De
defined. French literary circles have en-
deavored to push him into the background,
but so far as the outside world is concerned
he ranks higher than any OF his contem-
poraries among mis- countrymen. He con-
sidered himself a reformer. 1t is said, but
as such it is also too soon TO measure his
influence. Certainly his books are OF a sort
TO make vice repellent rather than attrac-
tive. but whether his portrayais have led
\ to any improvement In social conditions is
uncertain.
An act for which he most assuredly de-
serves honor was his espousal OF the cause
OF Dreyfus. 1t required courage to face off,
cial displeasure and popular opinion as he
did. He had written in behalf of Justice
I'm his novels: he fought for 1t now and
| for the credit of his country. That he won.
though at great cost. was doubtless one of
the proudest triumphs of his life.
He had not yet reached that age where