Evening star., 1937-12-05

tne clan, an lmputation that could not
fail to rankle."
In view Of these painful breaches
Of the family peace, Mr. Essary then
raises the question, "+ who knows
how strong the temptation will be,
when the time comes, to end forever
the argument in the Roosevelt family
as to its pre-eminent member by max
ing himself the first 12-year President
in our history?"'
Just a private family matter, in
other words. Laugh that off, If 1t
makes you feel like laughing. And
there Is something comic in it, too,
something comic in the idea that the
precedent laid down by Washington
and confirmed by Jefferson should
be scrapped in order to soothe the
hurt feelings of one who has been
jeered at or sneered at by his cousins,
grievous as such discourtesies unques-
tionably are. There is something posi-
lively hilarious in it. And there is
something in it, too, that is very
little akin to dictatorship. For it is
only in monarchies that you find
Ruling Houses.
COME months ago the reviewer, in
pursuance of her grim job of in
terpreting the periodicals, attempted
to place before her public in con-
densed form the sense of long, long
piece about communism VS.. fascism,
or something on that nature. The
author of the piece was in sky
sweeping mood. He sc.w the future
of the world as at stake and he
groaned with the responsibility of
making his readers understand how
immediate, no. important, how vivid
were the eventualities which he fore
saw Ending his work, he said the
great thing is for Communists-or
maybe Fascists-to keep their OBJ
jectives clear Only by keeping their
objectives clear, he declared, could
the parties of the first COR second)
part do whatever it was that he
thought they ought to do.
Well, the reviewer labored heavily
through his welter of prophecies, facts
and generalities to the end, hoping
that when he reached point so def
mite as that he might see his way
clear to saying something. But he
only said. Keep objectives clear"
And the reviewer, in an access of Bit
terness, observed that he might as
we'll have said. Put out the cat" or
Feed the goldfish" Indeed, the re-
viewer remarked that he might bet
ter have said. Put out the cat" or
Feed the goldfish" since those plain,
humble words at least meant some
thing.
The reviewer, struggling with maga-
zine articles for good many months,
had found that the language of maga-
zine writer's had become special thing,
bearing no apparent relation to any
reality. 1t was cluttered up not only
with "objectives,' which had to be
kept clear" but also with concepts"
"techniques.' "skills,' trends Co
ordinations" Corporations, social
outlooks." "integrations," "promulga-
tons, systems" values" economic
pressures.' environments" and
"technologicalties" and, whither-away.
Maybe it meant something, but no.
body could tell what! Therefore, said
the reviewer, who is a simple literary
critic, it was bad writing And writ
ing should not be bad 1t should not
be bad even when being bad is fash
ionable.
so NOW the reviewer halls with JOY
symptom that this turgid diet of
dull generalities has palled on other
tastes than her own, for up to now
she has been voice crying in the
wilderness. That symptom appears in
the December Harpers Magazine COM
| ing from the pen of Mr.. Stuart Chase
1t is an article called Word Trouble
Among the Economists"
Now Mr.. Chase has been himself
one of the worst offenders in the fer
vid using of dead terms; he has quite
recently had a period in which it
seemed to hurt him to write in any,
thing but concepts and objectives.
But he is, above all, smart journal
ist with finger on the public pulse
and, if he turns upon the practice of
writing in dead language, why
plainly it means that the public it
self is getting sick of it.
In his present piece he lays into the
verbiage of the popular economist
Though that any economist should
really be popular surpasses the re-
viewers credibilitO with his GUS
tomary manner of being in a fine
frenzy of discovery. Even so, he re-
mains smart journalist and he says
some very good things.