New-York tribune., 1903-01-25
Qbe Neln'2lofk gr1bno1es
ILLUSTRATED SUPPLEMENT-
SUNDAY, JANUARY %, 1913.

Mr. Sidney CoIvin after much reluctant pi'
of,r and false start or two, has put his he''u
into the biographical collar and really VIII "ii'e
about his long time friend, the iite ho'e
Iouis Stevenson. His work Will take liie ioi IL
of a personal memoir and "appfecia'ioh' W
rs he was intimate with the romahcef loI many
wears it is not improbable tnat he VIII IA
something more or less interesting 10 say u
If could well be spared. In fact, IL thiS eApioi'"
tion of Stevenson goes on much longer the 'U
name of the poor man VIII pecoihe d SUN"
horror to the reader. VIII he never pe ahoN'u
+o roS+9 We know already not only all that we
need TO know about him. but great deal iiioi T.
The corrective to the official biography written
,,- NJ Ra1fonr which some Stevensonians
see,n to think was imperatively demanded, WAS
cnnnliad in the brief essay which MI Hehiey
contributed to the subject. Furthermore, 1t HAS
pavpr heen nIain and we do not believe 1t ever
will he made plain, that the man around "holh
all this chatter RACES stands in any need OF SUCH
minute Interpretation to the Worid. we H'''
his works we have his letters, we nave ohlS loo
many portraits" of him drawn by MS COLI
temporaries and we have g0odly store oi
anecdotes In any case, it might seem as III we
had enough to judge by, but in this partcuiai
case anxiety to get to the very dregs OF the cup
seems especially absurd.
Tn = recent art criticism Mr.. c. L. Hind threw
his remarks into a more or less orahatlc ioiin'
discussing his subject with supposititious lay
man. The result was that he brought out the
characteristics of Frans Halls with uncommon
yividness and, incidentally, showed one way of
humanizing criticism We glad of his ex-
ample and wish that it might be followed IN
many quarters 1t has been said of the
Younger men" of the present day that they ape
the grey caution of eld, seldom allowing their
ideas to charge knee to knee against the
phalanxes of authority One anudote TO thlS
may no doubt be found in the frank exposure
of the personal point of view, but an even
better solution of the difficulty may be found In
q wider recognition of the fact that literature
is not an interest apart thing to be cultivated
in an ivory tower far uplifted above the
struggle and noise of ordinary mankind. Many
2 critic thinks and writes as if the faintest
concession to the every day spirit of humanity
were going to land him in Philistinism mac
curacy and numerous other awful and degrad-
ing sins. The innumerable devotees of this
Quaint ideal of scholarship are either 'prec-
iouS" or stodgy in style. a homely but racy
idom fills them with terror They would as
soon think of exchanging their solemn fnical
language for the free and nervous style of a
writer of merely natural gifts as they would
think of abandoning an obscure handwriting for
the coloresS style Of the old copybooks. They
talk at large about the soul, and the true
tragedy Of life, and all the rest of it, but they
handle an emotion with prodigious superiority.
Even your smart realistic novelist seeking
strength in squalOr, keeps a watchful and
most portentOus eye upon what he is pleased to
call his style. 1t will be a great day when the
critics in every sphere discover that art is in
spite of them, an essentially human affair.