The New York herald., 1922-07-30

rell, troude, w. u. Ward, Fdtner
Faber, and thence to Cardinals Man.
ming and Wiseman. His character
ization of Ward as the Doctor
johnson of the Catholic revival" is
apt.
Probably of wider interest, as
dealing with presumably more per-
durable products. is the considera-
ton Of the neo-Catholic poets: Cow
entry Patmore. Gerard Hopkins and
Aubrey de We're and. finally, Francis
Thompson. OF these Patmore and
Thompson have assuredly left re
mains" of enduring quality. There
are passages in the Angel in the
House." and in the Eros" that one
does not forget, and 1.-THE Hound of
Heaven" is surely as Immortal" as
any poem of the century. Both
men were genuinely of the Catholic
revival. though Patmore did not en-
ter the church until after he had
published a good deal-after a long
illness following the death of his
first wife. Incidentally, he mar
ried three times, not twice. as this
book gives it. And. although one no
longer expects proofreading. there
seems no excuse for such slip in
a book of this kind as the state
ment that Patmore was born in
1886. 1t should be 1929
Prof. Shuster admits that Pat
more was deeply influenced by Lam
dor, Tennyson and Rossetti. but adds
that although they saw Patmore's
genius. they were quite incapable
Of forming it." That is measurably
true; it did need the church to
bring about the mystic fusion of
earthly and divine love of the poems
of his later years. Prof. Shuster's
appreciation of Thompson is also
adequate and accurate. He sees in
him a mystic accidentally denied
his natural refuge and finding an
escape in song. Thompson" says
he, welded Poverty when she was
no longer lady, but the child was
a most beautiful song"
The book passes on to a brief
but appreciative mention Of the
many "inheritors"-Alice Meynell,
Wilfred Scawen Blunt, Louise Imo-
gen Quincy and several others. He
remarks, very neatly: ''Of course,
there is really no such being as
minor poet; one might speak as
intelligently of minor sunsets or
major mornings" The book is full
of pleasantly enlivening bits such
as that; enough to make it well
worth reading if it had no other
attractive qualities.
w.
Passing on to Ruskin. Pater and
the pre-Raphaelites, Prof. Shuster
energies upon less stable ground.
They are. obviously, related, but
equally obviously not quite Of the
family. Rossetti. as he admits, was
even "fiercely Protestant" 1t has
been said of Pater that IL he had
lived longer he might, very proba
bly,, have found his way into the
church, but the inference is at least
debatable. One suspects that the
metaphysician in him outweighed
the possible mystic. There is too
much of a genuinely Greek clarity
in his aesthetics to allow him full
admission to the romantic medic
valism of the church. Nevertheless
the Catholic revival was plainly Of
much moment in the making both
of Pater and the pre-Raphaelites.
1t is useful to have these elements
we'll pointed out. as Prof. Shuster
does it. He next passes the Catho-
lie historians in brief review, from
Alban Butler to the present
Much better worth while is his
consideration of the novelists, under
the heading Of Robert Hugh Ben
son and the Aging Novel" There
Is a nice suggestion in the word
aging" and it holds much truth.
1.-The later novel," says the author.
sis nothing il not social. What is
the problem propounded from Victor
Hugo to Patrick McGn? What are