Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1922-05-24
Master and Disciple

To tho Editor Of the Evening Public Ledger:
Sir--Is Alexander Dumas, the elder,
an immortal and Walter Scott only u
name? Or, more commonly, is "Grand
old Alexandra" as Thackcray--wasn'
it?-called him, being read by the
present generation, while the "Wizard
Of the North accumulates dust on
the shelves? Or. speaking ideally, |
ask is the Frenchman really great
novelist of the historicO- romantic
school and the Scotchmun only n
best seller" Of former day! Let
us think It over, fellow. forumites.
historical novel. Not only were the.
first in point Of time, but they presented
the model and accounted for the fasn-
ion. Dumas was proud to be known as
the French Scott. He was the disciple
and Scott was the master. 1t must not
be forgotten that Scott, like Byron.
had Continental vogue. He was as
much read abroad as ut home. His
European reputation exceeded, IL any
thing. his British one. And like Byron
again, when the original enthusiasm
was fading in the 1slaRds. his fame
upon the Continent was undiminished.
A disciple, to bo sure, can exceed
or even outgrow the master. While
Dumas did derive his inspiration from
Sir Walter, his talent was neither due
to that inspiration nor defined by it.
He was an original genius without
doubt. 1t IL said that Shakespeare
was inspired first by Kit Marlowe, and
Kit was great enough to furnish in
spiration, even to n Shakespeare. But
the distance between MarlOwe and
Shakespeare is great. Is the distance
between Scott and Dumas anywhere
near so great?
don't think SO. The distance
ter, is greater. I believe, than Dumas,
the disciple, not merely by the fact
that Scott set the pace, but also in
essential quality. Dumas is more sen
sational, more inspiring, has more
tricks to spring, all of which accords
better with our corrupted taste of to-
day, which demands speed, startlement.
superlatives, exaggeration. But Scott
remains the better dramatist.
What Is really adventitious about
Dumas pleases what is adventitious in
present day taste. He is keyed mp. lie
runs on high gear. Whereas Scott is
moderate, restrained, uses simple Ian
guage, employs milder contrasts. But
Scott is a great dramatist. His sit
uattOns, which are not sensational, are
superb. His conversations reveal the
characters. His plots, while not in
tricate. are adequate. And after we
have got tired of shrieks and tootings,
walls and bombastic stuff. we can 20
back to Scott for sane romanticism,
entertainment and instruction together,
Dumas has one advantage, which is
much. He is not restrained by the
Anglo -Saxon literary inhi5itions. lie
has as much literary liberty as did the
Elizabethans. Scott, to be sure, was
no Puritan, but he is extremely ere.
spectacle. He does not offend a
Puritan conscience or afflict the Ameri-
can and English sensibility that derives
from Puritanism.
On that very account, however. he
better does the Anglo Saxon art. And
this Is to be said, that British novel;
lists depict Continental characters and
situations better than Continental nov
clists ever have succeeded in doing Brit
isll ones. Continental artists do not
really try to render English characters
ana scenes. They caricature or mis-.
represent woefully. Dumas and Victor
hugo alike do so, as does any German
novelist that might be named
Dumas has another apparent adyan-
tage. French history may not be more
violent than British, but It is more
cruel. There Is not so great n SOW
ercisn In French history as Elizabeth:
nor one 30 sympathetic as Mary Queen
of Scots; but women such as Catherine
de- Medici, Marguerite de Valois. Marie
Antoinette do afford more deyiltry.
Cromwell may have been greater man
than any Frenchman ever born. Bona.
parte, for purposes of romance, is drab
compared to Richelieu.
Dumas may be an immortal. But if
he Is, so Is Scott The disciple rivals,
but does not eclipse, the master.
Philadelphia, May 10, 1929.