New-York tribune., 1922-08-06

duct Of Man." He named Ansfofe
France as writer whe is probable too
witty, 700 intelligent to endure ver.-
long. This Is pretty much my own
belief; ] am convinced that. leayi,e,
aside all question of sublin4jtv and
bored ON, She two major features of fke
worlds classics. the witty and arvno-
able worlds best books" bave sI-
ways won special dispensation ONLY
because they contained somewhere 81
their pages moral Lesson"
These lines are really the result Of q
rereaeing Of certain poems Of Cersr8
ce Nerval. He has written dez0n
pieces which must be counted amoar
the most beautiful in French poetr
OF superterregtrlsl inspirafica
lsupeFnatural was Gerard werd
their art is the forerunner of BAN b..
laire's, which it equals Jn beai,fs
Moved by curiosity, ! sought 70 d.
cover what the Freacn hiatoriane er
literature wrote 0f Neral In pruaa-
tiere there is TO mention of his usrae
Naturally, n Gerard de Nerva woald
not court for Bruuetiere. Three Other
manuals mark tire same omission. 4so
same silence. Finally, ! arrived a.
Lanson history, volume which
achieved 2 certain notorietv since lis
author was obliged 70 suppress MA
enormites about Baudelaire. Gerard
is noticed here IN FIVE commonplace
iinss az story writer. A. poet. ev,
IDENTIFY, he II non-existent. 7 aimed =
little higher. ] took down the "Efs-
toire de la literature francaise.o edited
in eight great volumes by ". Petit Dc
JuIleviiie. Of these, two are devoted
70 the nineteenth century, treated ir
4
Chantavoine takes a half-paee in tvbirb
to declare that Of Gerard De Ne~vaj
nothing remains but d httle valge
verse: And this is the poisonous gtew
given for nourishment in French.
schools. N ~
z SHOULD have thought that svsessliggss /
attentive reader o. Conrad m;gss -
have been sufficiently fascinated ssl
puzzled By his style to attempt TO lsz-s
q little Of his literary anteeedents. Ii.
deed, it had never occurred 10 ne Tia,
any one might dare % write absg.
Conrad without q knowledge Of ssess
ii Jeane dc Pierrefeu. the litersr
critic Of the ''Debets," mas done i
observe that he mentions in his pspsr
only books Of Conrad which have xes
~ O 20 > 4e4 Ss-t%s aA4EA l5o-A-i4Es @iseISEgFE
shat MS acquaintance with English IS
slight. nevertheless, it seems to M
superficial to say that Conrads talens
is 'tumultuoUs. picturesque aad
bizarre" The first epithet is only Toe
obviously ABSURD; he Others as
simply cheap. But the article {en.itla
TN Romancier q Adventarers7 would
not be worth noticing i VI. De PieGrs-
feu had not so far misresd Conrad
to assign definitely and exclusively
Except for q bare mention 0f DostoieT.
skyj his literary parenthood 70 Kiplias
Clearly. Mr. de Pierrefeu seized gpeB
& surface relation between ewo writer's
who placed their protagonlstg IN dit.
tant and tropical lands. Farther tHaa
this he could not 60 in his analysis,
because he was incompetent FOR .hs
estimation OF foreign writer. Read
ing IN French. he couldn't 60 behind
sentence structure 70 the fabric q
Conrad's and Kipling's personalities.
It is easy TO see that Conrad's C
casional grammatical lapses and esfg
callicisms would be corrected aza
would not shock the reader in French
He was blind, even TO the indIfeyeHes
in mechanical construction and hs
brings new proof that critics nus
deal very delicately indeed With tof-
eign literatures.