The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-04-25
feminine Characters


stock figures" He means of course
che very UP to date American nov
eliots, who invent heroines to suit the
fashionable illustrator Of the moment.
those gentlemen who write that 100000
people who run may read. Mr.. Jphnson's
own ladies are not stock fgures'-T do
not observe that the Salamander Is a
stock figure" and unless he has made
her too good to be true she does not seem
TO have been weakened by regard for
unconventional restrictions. And there
are Mrs. Wharton's ladies in The House
Of Mirth' and THE Custom Of the Coun
try"-Mrs. Wharton might have been as
frank about them as Flaubert was about
madame Bovary." but that would not
have made them more convincing. 1t re-
Quires genius to depict woman as Flau-
bert depicted his heroine and as Tostoy
painted Anna Karenna-when we shall
have a novelist OF genius in our country
we shall not consider the conventions.
The conventions will disappear in the
truth Just as they disappear In the story
Of Judith and Haloferncs or in that OF
Herod and Salome. What we need and
would be glad to have Is writer of
genius, and We have not had one since
Harold Frederick almost crossed the celes-
tial line.
As to European literature-Owen john
con means, I suppose. twentieth century
European literature-where Is Its con-
vincLng quality? French literature OF fic-
ton has become matter of pedigree
the best Of 1t is, SO to speak. underground.
Who finds the amusing. the cynical imi-
tator Of "Candide." Anatole France. CON
vincing"c or Pierre Lott. for all his
flashes OF the sacred fire? Or Henri
Bordeaux, or the long winded "Christophe"
man? or Rene Bazin, or Paul Bourget,
or that bourgeoisie imitator Of the aristo-
cratic author OF THE Romance of a
poOr Ypupp Man Ohuet They cnu write
but when authors write too well they
become dehumanrsed. and the Byzantine
age approaches. Who wants an Ameri
can Strindberg? Or an American Gustav
WED?
Perhaps the modern English writers
are included In the term European"
II they are Mr.. Maurice Hewlett can be
very unrestricted. but he is not always
convincing-though there are moments.
The conventions OF the English circulating
libraries hang over him, and yet they
permit him much freedom. So with Mr..
Galsworthy. II seems to me that his
Ozark Flower" which is the second OF
episodes in the life of an egoistic and
rather vulgar sensualist, Is example
Of the very frankest treatment of femi-
nine characters, but its frankness does
not make it convincing" II does not
ring true. though it speaks pretty. poetical
passages. Tom Jones" is truer and moro
convincing. but not SO pretty. Arnold
Bennett manages very well. and Wells. in
Marriage" makes us forget conventions
and think only of the truth. To be sure.
: :t;s, SM assia w becomes a mere
Thackeray left us few illusions about
Becky Sharp; but owen Johnson perhaps
feels that he might have been franker in
his analysis OF her than in his analysis of
Pendennis. Allowing for the greater lib
erty permitted to the novelist to-day.
owen Johnson has gone further in the
analysis--expressed by action rather than
words---of his Salamander than Thack-
cray dared to go. Becky Sharp had no
more scruples and no more conscience
than any woman who to-day chooses the
hardest way for the sake of limousine
and a pearl necklace. She took her world
as she found II and what she found in It.
As for the other world. she slept out the
thought of It, The modern woman OF this
same type could not be made more con-
vincing by franker analysis. You would
simply see more of the author and less OF
her.
The novelist in America who knows the
truth and can express II need not trouble
himself about mere conventions; but the
author-of the best sellers must keep an
uneasy eye on his buyers, and they still
insist that a perfect lady In fiction must
have some clothes on but who knows
when their taste will change.