New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-02-07


Of letters would willingly dispense with a single
volume. for in each OF the twelve there is some
thing worth reading. 1t is on his realization OF
that fact that the critics competence to placs
Hazlitt in the right perspective depends
He is the sworn foe Of the Superior Person.
who to this day is bewildered by his mascu-
line variety, and fancies that he is making
fitting sacrifice 70 the Muses. when he assumes
toward this writer patronizing attitude The
author OF these extremely miscellaneous volumes
Sved before the age Of what we call scientific
scholarship. but which too often means rank
pedantry and sOuIless devotion to formula.
He knew his business but he had nothing in
common with the latter day specialist who
may be either Of genius a medOcrity.
a useful scholar or an Industrious hack, con-
ferring upon himself brevet of literary impor-
lance through the mere act of wreaking his
poor faculties upon some particular line of ere
search" HazIitt had small confidence in for
mule: he preferred to draw upon his temporal
ment, to rely upon that individual instinct
which We have only learned to distrust because
so many youthful practitioners OF sO-called i'm
pressionistic criticism have brought it into dis
repUte- In fact. Hazlitt was simply one Of those
men who are born 10 apprehend works Of lit
erature and art with intelligence and feeling;
who are not meant to lay down the law, but to
transmit to others the SAVIOR OF the thing they
talk or write about There is nothing pontifcaI
about them Possibly that is why they are not
nowadays Invariably understood. The result OF
our passion for conclusive judgments" and the
hard and fast classification Of everything in lit
erature-which will not permit to discuss
any classic without pigeonhOling it's that we
forget the natural human aspect Of most il
not all literary productions. Hazlitt would have
CHI Io6 ha hqT o-Lra -TYfa t.
posterity. He was content to let the readers OF
his own time know what he thought on this or
that subject. and if he was often vehement in
praise dspraise. it was not because he took
himself too seriously but because he was a man
OF feeling as well as Of ideas. Lamb. who loved
him well. and was with him when he died found
him Gin his natural and healthy state. one OF
the wisest and finest spirits breathing" Enter
into his moods. read him with sympathy. and
the sensation you have is one of familiar inter-
course with that kind of a man Is not thar
.thins worth having? Certainly for the
sake Of it We can forgive Hazlitt for having
written too much.
The truth is that he did this any does
it who does not live in the still air Of some
secluded library. dedicated to one high task. but
is obliged by circumstances. and. perhaps. by
the impulses Of his nature. TO come down into
affairs which occupy the public at large. Never
was there a critic with less professionalism in
his makeup. HazItt was, of course. no anna
teur. but if there is one thing more than another
which a survey of his work disclOses. it is THAI
he lived as well as wrote; that il he cared for
poetry and art he cared ALSO for politics and
sport Beneath his daily life throbbed the emo
ton OF the artist but it is important to remeU-
Der that in Hazlitt the man and the artist
inextricably intertwined. each helping the other
Mr.. Henley in the essay which he wrote NOT
long before his death as an introduction % this
edition. one Of the best bits OF writing he ever
put TO his credit pointed out the unique value
OF EIazIitts summary of the fight between Hick-
man and Bill Neate. Hazlitt. are told.
looked on at the proceedings Of Neate and the
Gasght Man exactly as he had looked on az
divers creations OF Edmund kean." and stress
Is laid upon the fact that he gives you only the
vital touches" II was with the detachment q
the artist that he stood at the ringsde. he
sat in the playhouse. But it was n COnnois-
seur OF life that he observed both pugilism and
the drama, as u seeker after sensations. What
4 difference there is between him. SO considered.
and the more modern author, pursuing much
the same endi Compare his writings with what
Mr.. Henley had the humOr TO describe as the
dsscOursings of the late imperishable Mr.. Pater.
or compare him with such type as Mr.. Arthur
Syuons On the one side you have straight
forward masculine nature. plunging into life
IF a Wholesome