New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-12-31
THE TRUTH ABOUT r. l.. S.
An illustration of the Difficulty of
Making His Adorers See 1t.
K. Shorter, in The London Sphere.

Z. shorter, IN The London Sphere
suggestion is made in 1.-The Outlook" of
last week that on the occasion of the unwilling
of the Stevenson memorial at Edinburgh I took
the opportunity Ito put little daub of Journal
istic mud upon his name and reputation" This
is nonsense. merely pointed out that Steven
sons admirers had not sufficiently backed their
opiniOns-that they had started to erect statue
TO Stevenson at Edinburgh, and had ended by
erecting a mere tablet in church. This I re-
GREETED, as Stevenson was certainly much de-
serving of q statue as many of those whom
Edinburgh has delighted to honor IN the past
L quite understand that the wildly indiscrimi-
nate admirer of Stevenson should be unable to
appreciate anything IN the shape of criticism.
No man has been brought less under the light
Of criticism than Stevenson His must have been
a delightful personality. He secured enthsuias-
tic friends Many Of these friends were critics,
but the glamour OF great personal friendship
absolutely destroyed their gift so far it re-
lated TO Il. L. S. When these good friends sat
down to write about Stevenson's books they lost
all balance all power of appraisement.
1t was my misfortune not to know Mr.. Steven
son, never to come under that personal glamour
although l had some very pleasant letters from
him, and of his original manuscripts is | am
happy to say, in my library. I am able, there
fore. TO take purely critical attitude and I
venture to believe that my attitude Is a sound
one. 1 admit that Mr.. Stevenson was a charm
ing writer who has given great deal of pleas
I only regret that his various friends
Sidney Colvin, William Archer. Edmund Gosse
and number of others-should have led a cru
sade of laudation which has basis whatever
in actual truth.
Any half-dozen critics who are in agreement
rest of the writers In newspaper land Will fol-
low blindly in his praise.
These are the Dark Ages Of English literary
criticism and it is the business of this letter
to endeavor to hold the torch, even though II
be the idimmest of flashlights, with the view
to a just appraisement of overrated literary
work.
Let 4 be granted that Mr. Stevenson was q
pleasant writer, that his Treasure IsIand' is
a capital book for boys. that his Master OF Bal
lantrae" is a readable story for 'grown-ups'
that his ''Virginibus Puersque' is a remarka bic
volume OF essays. and that in his "Chld's Gar
den of Verses there is much TO please the little
ones. Certainly Stevenson was industrious
and agreeable writer, and he had sense
for style that few have to-day. But that is quite
another thing TO his being great writer which
to read some of the euloeies that have been
passed upon him. one might be misled into as
Stunning
The great writers OF every epoch are those who
strike new note. who break away from con-
Vention. Not in one single department OF his
literary work did Stevenson break away from
convention. Carlyle was a great writer Rua-
kin was a great writer, Scott was a great
writer. George Borrow was a great writer ex-
acty as in poetry Wordsworth. Shelley and
Byron were great writers, because all these men
ala break away from convention and contrib
uted something entirely TO English litera
TIRE But all this is seif-evident 10 every on.