New-York tribune., 1907-05-19
Che NeAsuo2lorls 0ribmsae.
SUNDAY. MAY 10, 1907.

Mr.. Alfred Noyes, the clever young poet to
whose writings reference las lately been made
in The Tribune, has been delivering his mind
in the London "Bookman' on the antics of Mr.
G. b. Shaw His outburst is apropos Of Mr.
Slaw's volumes of Dramatic Opinions and Els
says" Mr. Noyes las no illusions about Mr.
Shaw or about his mentally bankrupt admir-
ers" and he pays his compliments to both in
many good sayings which we would like to
quote. But what chiefly interests MS is the
point which is thus made: 'These two vol
umes of vulgariSm require straight speaking
from any critic who has managed to retain the
slightest respect for English literature. :.
1t would be an unkindness to cut his capers
short too soon il they amuse him. But it is
our duty to the great and famous dead, the
duty of all sincere critics, with q respect for
our literature. to say that Mr.. Shaw's capers
nre vulgar fatuous and extremely wearisome.
We aware of the fact that this duty Is
regarded in many quarters as wearisome, su-
pcrfluouS, and, in short, juStifably to be
neglected. 1t is so much more comfortable to
go with the tide to be popular, and. above all
things, to avoid the imputation of not being
advanced" Nevertheless, it is duty which
no right minded critic, having reverence for the
masters Of literature, can fail to discharge TO
acQucSCe in Yulgarty, no matter how clever
it may seem to be, is, in the long run, to help
the debasins OF the currency OF thought
That man must indeed be enviable who,
with stolid resolution, can rise sublime above
all his critics. Such a man is Mr. John David
son, whose poetry has somehow failed to set
the Thames ablaze. He does not care. On
the contrary, he is stimulated by the imbecli-
.icS of his critics. Some of them did not like
-Ihc Theatrocrat," which he published not so
Gerry long ago, Whereupon he replied to them
IN divers journals, but he disdans to reply in
like manner to what he calls their attack on
his more recent work, The Triumph of Nam
mon" In the first place, he is in Penzance,
and that seems to him too far from London to
make controversy convenient But chiefly he
restraints himself because what he could say
with full purpose would be unsuitable for
publication in any periodical" Then, in the
brief letter which he has been willing to send
to the press, he goes on in this wise:
I would define art in England at the begin
ming Of the twentieth century that which
cannot be discussed in any newspaper. in any
weekly. monthly quarterly: that which can
not be produced in any theatre: that which can
not h hung or placed by any committee. Later
on. when Socialism. the final stage in the deca-
dence of Chrstendom, has corrupted the whole
body of the State. /. another. may have TO
define art in England as that which has become
impossible.
1t would seem though. under these cir
cumstances, an artist ought to be profoundly
unhappy, but Mr.. Davidson is q jocund soul
He takes pains 10 get from press clipping
bureau all the evidence of the stupidity of the
critics, and he declares that he rejoceS in the
virulcncc OF his enemies. for a man is not
even half known, in his opinion. by the com
pany he keeps. The enemies he succeeds in
making are the true mark Of his character
and Of the greatness Of his attention" De
cidedly, Mr.. Davidson is happy man.
1t is a pity that publishers cannot please
everyone An anonymous correspondent Of
"The Academy" is in distress because he can
not find publisher ready TO do what he wants
done. For a long period" he says, Il have
engaged in translating, with the utmost care