The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-09-10

There is at the present moment a
great revival of interest in Matthew
Arnold, says the New York Sun 1t
was his misfortune that during his life
the less important part OF his work
made the most fuss. It was the Arnold
who Slapped a solemn creed with sol
emn sneer, who repeated and repeated
himself on religion and Philistinism, that
interested the people of his time, and
not the Arnold of The Scholar Gypsy"
OF Friendships Garland and the es-
say on "Joubert-" But now the chaff
rs being separated from the grain. The
things that were so much admired. SO
much Chartered aboSdt and discussed by
certain seekers after sweetness and
light and cultured souls, are passing
into the limbo of forgotten or half
gotten books.
Mr. c. w. Z Russell has not pro-
duced a satisfactory book in his Mat
thew Arnold" (Scribners) in the Lit
erary Lives Series But it is hardly his
fault 1t was Arnold's express E-.Sh
that he should not be made the subject
OF biography. Why, it is hard to say.
as in the case Of Thackeray- The present
volume, in consequence, is not, as it
might have been, at once a history Of
his life, an estimate of his work, and
an analysis of his character and opin-
ions.
So scrupulous have the family been
on this subject that when ArnOld's let
tiers were published in 1895. the eXcis-
ions were so extensive as to give
wrong impression OF the man VINO
wrote them. Mr.. Russell gives a curious
example of this. It was stated by one
critic that whereas the poet and critic
appeared to have loved his parents
brothers, sisters and children, he did
not seem to have cared for his wife.
Yet it seems that their married life was
one long honeymoon
So in Arnold's case the nearest we
can come to a life is to be found in a
series of letters, in extracts. Everything
purely personal has been cut out Is IL
any wonder that many should get the
impression that the man was a priS
and afraid to let himself go, knowing
that what Newman called the cOnsecra-
ton of print was bound to come some
timer One feels that It would be well
If. in Arnold'S case, some member OF
his family showed courage enough, for
the sake of his reputation, to disregard
his wishes and provide US with renints-
cences of the sort that Mrs. Richie,
the daughter of Thackeray, prepared
for one editor of her fathers works.
Mr.. Russelis book is only a discourse
on Arnold as he is revealed in his VIII
fngs. Any person who is acquainted
with the essays, the poems, the reports
on education. the books on philosophic
or religious subjects, VIII md no new
light here. 1t all leaves on one the i'm
preston Of something made to order,
though it is shot through with real en-
thusiasm. At the same time Mr.. Rus-
sell does not hesitate to point out why
AEnOAu WIS lOL AONGu III NCA tam ANeA-
ters-
He was critical of his own country,
critical Of all foreign nations, critical OF
existing institutions, critical or we'll
meant but uninstructed attempts to set
them right He was the partisan of no
cause, creed, party or system. He
found new things admirable Take the
case of this country. He admitted that
our political and social problem" had
been we'll solved But he did not think
that we had solved the human problem
OF ''humaniZation in society He did
not think the American life was In
teresting. And how did he prove ltg
BY pointing out that Americans lived
willingly in places with such names as
BriggsviIle, Jacksonville and Marcel
lus Hence Americans had no sense OF
beauty, distinction or elevation All
this was characteristic Of the intellect
attitude of the man toward society
wherever ne found it.
The fact remains; If Arnold, the dis
coveEer of Philistinism. was himself a
Philistine, Just as Thackeray, the dis
coverer of snobs, was himself q snob'
the fact does not make him any the less
interesting. Every American can well
afford to read his essay on Numbers,
lust as every Englishman ought to read,
and take to neart, Friendships Gar
land"