New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-10-11
Gbe Nem'lDork grihmaae.
SUNDAY, OCTOBER II, 1903.
ILLUSTRATED SUPPLEMENT.

One particularly pleasant fact about the new
books issuing in such large numbers from the
presses just now is that so many OF them are
old ones. That is to say, the vogue OF the re-
print is becoming almost as great as that OF
the novel, and there is to be. apparently, no
limit set in this field Of activity save that very
distant one where the good old books end and
the bad old books begin. OF course the new
edition of classic is, if we may risk the phrase
thing. 1t has been with us for years
one OF the recognized features of every publish
ers list Nevertheless there has never hitherto
been anything like the enthusiasm among pub
fishers for reprints of all sorts such as we wit
ness now. In form they range to-day from the
magnificence of the Houghton Montague or
the edition of Landor's "Pericles and ASpasia,"
which we notice on another page, to the dainty
elegance of the Temple Classics" published
by the MacmillanS, the "CaXtOn Thin Paper
Editions" imported by the Scribners. And these
reprints include much more than was formerly
considered profitable by the publishers. The
famous poets and rOmancers, OF course, are duly
remembered, but theirs are far from being the
only writings put in new form. All the essay
lists, not alone Lamb, but HaZltt, Hunt De
Quincy, and so on, are drawn upon, old dia-
rsts like Evelyn and PepyS are reproduced, and
there is every sign that old memoirs will soon
sporting classics have lately been revived, and
in respect TO travels we have, for example, the
new and really monumental edition of Yule's
Marco Polo" In brief, not only have more
reprints than ever, but they are almost uni
formly reprints worth having
writer in ''The Chicago Dial' is troubled by
what he calls "Our Critical Self Consciousness"
and he writes at some length to show just what
I,o
do about it American critics." he says, "have
now been writing about American literature
'fOr something like hundred years, and their
work has been characterized, as a rule by an
) exaggerated consciousness of the existence of
'the parent literature on the other side of the
ocean" Is the case really as bad as all that?
We confess that we are not only surprised to
hear it, but little sceptcal. If American crit
ciSm of American literature has suffered from
anything, should say that it has been often
from being too American. Yet to say this with
out qualification would be rs unfair as the con-
tributor TO The Dial" strikes Us as being. He
thinks that the relations Of our literature to
English literature should not be emphasized in
season and out Of season, but that lit would
"be better to acknowledge them frankly once
for all. and then leave them to be taken as
implicit IN the history, bringing them into
prominence only when some case of real anal
"ogy or contrast arises Well, is this not Just
what American critcs-and by critics we mean
critics. not dabsters in precOsity. venal
hacks-have all along been doing?
Every time valuable old master possessed
in England has been sold to q private collector
or to public gallery in the United States or
On the Continent there have been plaintve
articles in the London journals about the back
wardnesS Of a government that could allow
such distressing things to occur In the inter
walls of abusing the government the director
and trustees Of the National Gallery are apt
10 suffer from some pretty harsh sayings At
last action promises to take the place of uueru-
lous complaint, and it seems likely that a so
ciety will be founded in the United Kingdom
similar to the SOciete des Amis du Louvre in
Paris, and to the Kaiser Friedrich Verein in
Berlin, its object being to come to the rescue
whenever a work of art is in the market that
ought TO become the property of the State
ana the State fails to do its duty. Americans
cannot but be interested i'm this scheme for
ITS success threatens the development of our