New-York tribune., 1906-11-04
Gbe Nem'llork gribmoae.
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 4. 1906.

That an author should do what he pleaseS |
with his own would seem to be 4 reasonable |
idea, but there are certainly circumstances I'M
der which it would seem equally reasonable to
ask him to restrain himself Mr.. w. B. Yeats |
has just brought out volume entitled Poems, |
lS0G-19O5," and to 'SThe Academy which had
described it as reprint, his publisher writes, |
saying: 'I venture to ask you TO qualify this |
statement, seeing that although the book con- |
tains previously published matter the dramas |
therein included have been largely rewritten, |
and the additions and alterations made by the |
author entitle the book to fresh consideration"
The complaining publisher Mr. 4. H. Buen, is |
himself d man of letters. and one, moreover, |
for whose judgment we have always had re-
spect. Nevertheless we feel that this rewriting
and altering of minor poetry has been already
somewhat OversOne. There is, after all, no
reason why 4 writer should carry on his edu-
cation in public. 1t is scarcely fair for him to
claim that better men have given him a prece-
dent. The whole point lies in the character of
the literary personality involved in the i'm
portance TO the world at large of the work
corrected. An author must have earned, by
really solid services to literature, the right to
take the public into his confidence and TO ask
for Il patient acquieSence in the editing that
he believes one of his published volumes to re
Quire. OF course the correction of details in 4 |
work of scholarship is another matter. In
Imaginative literature the SportSmanlike thing |
Is to stand by what you have written or. at
most, to wait until time and fate have justified
the preparation of collected edition.
In the midst of the turmoil created by the
quarrel between the English publishers and !
"Ihe Times" Book Club there is heard dmly, !
and then, plaintive voice asking, where \
does the author come in:" Some of the replies
disclose grave anxiety. Others are optimistic.
Tor our own part we do not think that the
author is likely to suffer. When the storm
blows over he will doubtless find that he Is
still safe. But suppose his royalties should be
reduced? Suppose the popular novelist should |
find it necessary to get along with only one |
motor ear? Is there not something in the pur- |
suit of letters more important than cash? One !
Weares sometimes of all this fret about the |
market value of Il book. The IabOrer is worthy |
Of his hire The Tribune has always been on |
the side of justice in copyright legislation. II /
has always maintained that the author should |
enjoy adequate return for the benefit he
r0nferS upon mankind-when it is benefit |
But who has carefully observed the |
literary conditions of time can have failed
tO see that preOcCupatiOn with the money Uues- /
ton has ruined many promising talent We
make no comment upon those who can plead
necessity though there is much to be said ON
that point. The eases have more especially |
in mind those of authors who have sue
cccded so well that they could rest on their oars
for years on end, letting new book mature |
slowly in their minds, but whose eagerness for |
MI the things that money buy leads them
to turn from art to manufacture.