New-York tribune., 1919-11-22
Morals, Art and All That

aolds true of the 'Decameron' and The
Hrabian Nights; but | do not say that
hey mad better be banshed to Forty
5econd Street (perhaps they are;
aoht know; for at ali events they are
ciiassics hat have stood the test of
eime and become part of mems heritage
ot " sr culture (Which cannot yet be said
od ne Moon and SixpenceD, so that
l, Ione peneht at least would tend to
ona onlInce inc harm that they may cause;
ana anyway-consoling thought
there is less danger that those whom
.hey .hey might harm would seize upon
'Inem' men, since they are old, and youth
nn.es m what is old But as for The
MOON and Sixpence,' so much talked
anout' with its alluring title whats
ailurlnS about the 'Decameron.' when
so So, 1ew OF the rising generation can
lell what 1T means ?)--that would not
.ong De left in innocuous desuetude
concerning MIR. Broun's beauty
virtue remarks-the two qualities do
uoe seem TO me any more incompatible
en@n lnseparable. Of course, the
ouIved me of beauty does not in
d',t d.."piy lollow the straight one of
uIuuy "a geometrical impossiblity, be-
lcVe), but they are bound to cross
somewhere; they are not of those
parallels of which it may be said that
never she twain shall meet" (By
.he way, believe scientists have lust
proved that there are no Euclidean
parallels, anyway They don't ALWAYS
meet us true; they don't, for instance
~ o"lnburne, or Baudelaire, or Catul-
ius' or Anacreon, whom | personally
should not want to shun for that rea-
son; out the sheer beauty of such
compositions as TO a Skylark,' or the
y, Ude on Grecian urn,' or 'Uber allen
" prem, or 'Extase,' or % Fons Ban
dusln@,' or an infinite host of others
does not necessarily bring impuritv in
It's train, and is enhanced. to nv con
servatlve mind, by this very fact. Why.
Mr. b"oun, do you assume, with those
VINO have christened devils causeways
ana chasms and pools and seats ali over
0ne world, that beauty is necessarily
on Luciter's side?
And aren't you getting a little
mixed IN your imagery, according to
yDur own theories, when you sunder
ruth from beauty? Is not beauty
truth, truth beauty, after all? Blessed
ness, according to your ideas, NAV be
ugly; but truth? Have you not Just
said: At least a part of the secret
or effective writing is the frank ex-
preston Of that which lies in the
heart of man? Or have you shifted
Your ideas, and do you mean now by
beauty mere superficial prettiness :?
Which do you consider The Moon and
SlXpence.' beautiful or truthful? Do
you not find it beautiful just because
g is. according to you, truthful? Is
not that your major premise? While
my major premise is that a thing IS
not necessarily untruthful because it
S morally beautiful. For a fine dis
cussicn of the relationship existing
petween these two qualities read the
epening chapter Of George Sands La
..are- diable.'
But have wandered far afeld from
he question of libraries. Let me re-
CIT to them moment and remind
.. ). Has has already been pointed
ur~that the library exercises the
rower of selection, not that OF seclu-
sion or of censorship. 1t doesn't say, as
yon, Mr. Broun, said it says. This is
{ book which you must not read Of
course if reading necessarily implies
.eading for nothing, that is o different
matter. The person who won't pay
the price for The Moon and Sixpence
md who can't get it IN public library
mas only one other resource: to write
10 Haywood Broun, in the hope of
landing IN About Column and find
ing he aforesaid Moon and Sixpenco
on ii. BIS open shelves AS | have
done. ADELAIDE"