New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-05-24
GLE Nem;pork gribma1&
ILLUSTRATED SUPPLEMENT
SUNDAY. MAY "a, 1905.

If any importance is to be attached TO the
rapidly increasing activity of certain school
of writer's now in the public eye, the piace VI
fact in fiction will have to be recolslueieu'
Hitherto even your pronounced realist las oeeh
expected to use fact only as OASIS lor nio
novel. and though he has often been disposed
70 treat it for its own sake, he has generally
managed to fell story into the bargain. NO"
we are constantly reading DOCKS ike 'hoee
which we review under the head OF hctioh Oh
ono+her mage to-day in which fact is pretty
hcarly everything. Apparently an auuIol
comes forward with special confidence when Ne
can claim that his book is simply TRANSCRIPT
from experience. We are not quarreliing WIN
him for book of this nature is often hlShly
Interesting. But it would be good IDEA for
some of these authors to confer with lhelr
nublishers with q view to the formulauon oi
some phrase which would Adequately descripe
the literary form in question. 1t is N.Y.
and it ought to be distinctly labelled as SUCH.
If the reader is getting narrative OIL pefsonai
adventure founded on fact, and only thlhly uls-
ouisad he ought to know 1t. Still more 1mpor-
tant is it that he should be warned that ne is
reading fiction pure and simple when the pooA
before him. while nominally reciting actual oc-
currences, is really made up out OF Wnole cio'h'
been treated unfairly in the matter OF the Car-
,yIa Life and Letters" One of the guild re-
minds his critics that Mr.. Carlyle hlmseI
,-iSbed tap truth 10 he told, and also annotated
tbe letters for publication; and but for MT.
I,roude's editorial and biographical work there
youId not have been half the interest IN the
personalities of the Carlyles or the mousse tley
lived ill., as is now the case" 1t must cohsoie
this complainant a little, and many olhers' "
observe that this opinion is much more seheI
ally held than may have seemed the case witch
the '.New Letters and Memorials OF Jane NeiSh
CarlvIe' were published a short time ago. our
own conclusion, stated when the book appeareu'
that Cir lanes Crichton- Browne and Mr.. Alex
ander Carlyle, who edited ana annolateu It,
only damaged their own case by railing at
Froude and left mistaken his authority III
essentials. seems to be widely shared Never
was more supererogatory piece of work un
6ortaEen" saws an acute critic writing IN 'Ihe
1or,Ien Saturday Review" and everywhere
omoun the better English journals we hnd the
book treated with due appreciation OIL "ha'
wc owe to Froude. good deal OF the o"liSh
tvaddle which has recently been dlrecteu
AGAINST him is to be aScribed, we fancy, 10 tue
readiness with which uninstructed Scriooiers
seize upon the bait that lies on the surface OIL
any controversial episode. Sir James Crlchloh
Browne and Mr.. Alexander Carlyle assured
them that Carlyle had been misrepresented, ana
that Froude was a mischiefmaker, they ac-
cepted the situation-"new," and sensational
rs il seemed to them-and proceeded to write
if m, ut IA great rate. This sort OF thing mas
bapDcned before. and has been invariably OF
no earthly use to anybody. The line OF least
resistance" is proverbially snare.
The condemnation of Partisan novelist and
Journalist TO two months Imprisonment, the