One would think that in writing about
literary men and matters there would be no difficulty
in finding a title for one’s essay, or that any
embarrassment which might arise would be from excess
of material. I find this, however, far from being
the case. ‘Men of Letters,’ for example,
is a heading too classical and pretentious. I
do indeed remember its being used in these modern
days by the sub-editor of a country paper, who, having
quarrelled with his proprietor, and reduced him to
silence by a violent kick in the abdomen, thus addressed
him: ’I leave you and your dirty work for
ever, and start to-night for London, to take up my
proper position as a Man of Letters.’ But
this gentleman’s case (and I hope that of his
proprietor) was an exceptional one. The term in
general is too ambitious and suggestive of the author
of ‘Cato,’ for my humble purpose.
‘Literature as a Profession,’ again, is
open to objection on the question of fact. The
professions do not admit literature into their brotherhood.
‘Literature, Science, and Art’ are all
spoken of in the lump, and rather contemptuously (like
’reading, writing, and arithmetic’), and
have no settled position whatever. In a book of
precedence, however a charming class of
work, and much more full of humour than the peerage I
recently found indicated for the first time the relative
place of Literature in the social scale. After
a long list of Eminent Personages and Notables, the
mere perusal of which was calculated to bring the
flush of pride into my British cheek, I found at the
very bottom these remarkable words, ’Burgesses,
Literary Persons, and others.’ Lest haughtiness
should still have any place in the breasts of these
penultimates of the human race, the order was repeated
in the same delightful volume in still plainer fashion,
’Burgesses, Literary Persons, etc.’
It is something, of course, to take precedence in
going down to dinner, for example even
of an et cetera; but who are Burgesses?
I have a dreadful suspicion they are not gentlemen.
Are they ladies? Did I ever meet a Burgess, I
wonder, coming through the rye? At all events,
after so authoritative a statement of its social position,
I feel that to speak of Literature as a profession
would be an hyperbole.
On the other hand, ‘The Literary
Calling’ is not a title that satisfies me.
For the word ‘calling’ implies a certain
fitness; in the religious sense it has even more significance;
and it cannot be denied that there are a good many
persons who devote well, at least, their
time to literature, who can hardly be said to have
‘a call’ in that direction, nor even so
much as a whisper. At the same time I will venture
to observe, notwithstanding a great deal of high-sounding
twaddle talked and written to the contrary, that it
is not necessary for a man to feel any miraculous
or even extraordinary attraction to this pursuit to
succeed in it very tolerably. I remember a now
distinguished personage (in another line) who had
written a very successful work, expressing his opinion
to me that unless a certain divine afflatus animated
a man, he should never take up his pen to address
the public. The writing for pay, he added (he
had at least L5,000 a year of his own), was the degradation
of literature. As I had written about a dozen
books myself at the time, and most decidedly with
an eye to profit, and had never experienced much afflatus,
this remark discouraged me very much. However,
as the gentleman in question did essay another volume,
which was so absolute and distinct a failure that
he promptly took up another line of business (far
above that of Burgesses), it is probable he altered
his views.
Nature of course is the best guide
in the matter of choosing a pursuit. When she
says ‘This is your line, stick to it,’
she seldom or never makes a mistake. But, on
the other hand, her speech must be addressed to mature
ears. For my part, I do not much believe in the
predilections of boyhood. I was never so simple
as to wish to go to sea, but I do remember (when between
seven and eight) having a passionate longing to become
a merchant. I had no notion, however, of the preliminary
stages; the high stool in the close street; luncheon
at a counter, standing (I liked to have my meals good,
plentiful, often, and in comfort, even then); and
imprisonment at the office on the eves of mail nights
till the large hours p.m. Even the full fruition
of such aspirations the large waistcoat
beginning to ‘point,’ (as it soon does
in merchants), heavy watchchain, and cheerful conviction
of the coming scarcity of necessaries for everybody
else, would have failed to please. The sort of
merchant I wanted to be was never found in ‘Post
Office Directory,’ but in the ‘Arabian
Nights,’ trading to Bussorah, chiefly in pearls
and diamonds. When the Paterfamiliases of my
acquaintance instance certain stenches and messes
which their Toms and Harrys make with chemicals all
over their house, as a proof of ‘their natural
turn for engineering,’ I say, ‘Very likely,’
or ‘A capital thing,’ but I think
of that early attraction of my own towards Bussorah.
The young gentlemen never dream of what I once heard
described, in brief, as the real business life of a
scientific apprentice: ’To lie on your back
with a candle in your hand, while another fellow knocks
nails into a boiler.’
Boys have rarely any special aptitude
for anything practical beyond punching each others’
heads, or (and these are the clever ones) for keeping
their own heads unpunched. As a rule, in short,
Nature is not demonstrative as respects our professional
future.
It must nevertheless be conceded that
if the boy is ever father to the man in this respect,
it is in connection with literature. Also, however
prosaic their works are fated to be, it is curious
that the aspirants for the profession below Burgesses
always begin with Poetry. Even Harriet Martineau
wrote verses in early life bad enough to comfort the
soul of any respectable parent. The approach to
the Temple of Literary Fame is almost always through
double gates couplets. And yet I have
known youthful poets, apparently bound for Paternoster
Row, bolt off the course in a year or two, to the
delight of their friends, and become, of their own
free will, drysalters.
There is so much talk about the ’indications
of immortality in early childhood’ (of a very
different kind from those referred to by Wordsworth),
and it is so much the habit of biographers to use
magnifiers when their subject is small, that it needs
some courage to avow my belief that the tastes of
boys have very little significance. A clever
boy can be trained to almost anything, and an ordinary
boy will not do one thing much better than another.
With the Geniuses I will allow (for the sake of peace
and quietness) that Nature is all-powerful, but with
nine hundred and ninety-nine out of a thousand of us,
Second Nature, Use, is the true mistress; and what
will doubtless strike some people as almost paradoxical,
but is nevertheless a fact, Literature is the calling
in which she has the greatest sway.
It is the fashion with that enormous
class of people who don’t know what they are
talking about, and who take up cuckoo-cries, to speak
contemptuously of modern literature, by which they
mean (for they are acquainted with little else) periodical
literature. However small may be its merits,
it is at all events ten times as good as ancient periodical
literature used to be. A very much better authority
than myself on such a subject has lately informed
us that the majority of the old essays in the Edinburgh
Review, at the very time when it was supposed to
be most ‘trenchant,’ ‘masterly,’
‘exhaustive,’ and a number of other splendid
epithets, are so dull and weak and ignorant, that it
is impossible that they or their congeners would now
find acceptance in any periodical of repute.
And with regard to all other classes of old magazine
literature, this verdict is certainly most just.
Let us take what most people suppose
to be ‘the extreme case,’ Magazine Poetry.
Of course there is to-day a great deal of rant and
twaddle published under the name of verse in magazines;
yet I could point to scores and scores of poems that
have thus appeared during the last ten years, which
half a century ago would have made and deservedly
have made a high reputation for their authors.
Such phrases as ’universal necessity for practical
exertion,’ ‘prosaic character of the age,’
etc., are, of course, common enough; but those
who are acquainted with such matters will, I am sure,
corroborate my assertion that there was never so much
good poetry in our general literature as exists at
present. Persons of intelligence do not look
for such things perhaps, and certainly not in magazines,
while persons of ‘culture’ are too much
occupied with old china and high art; but to humble
folks, who take an interest in their fellow-creatures,
it is very pleasant to observe what high thoughts,
and how poetically expressed, are now to be found about
our feet, and, as it were, in the literary gutter.
I don’t compare these writers with Byrons and
Shelleys; I don’t speak of them as born poets
at all. On the contrary, my argument is that
second nature (cultivation, opportunities of publication,
etc.) has made them what they are; and it is
immensely creditable to her.
AGATHA.
’From under
the shade of her simple straw hat
She
smiles at you, only a little shamefaced:
Her gold-tinted
hair m a long-braided plait
Reaches
on either side down to her waist.
Her rosy complexion,
a soft pink and white,
Except
where the white has been warmed by the sun,
Is glowing with
health and an eager delight,
As
she pauses to speak to you after her run.
’See with
what freedom, what beautiful ease,
She
leaps over hollows and mounds in berrace;
Hear how she joyously
laughs when the breeze
Tosses
her hat off, and blows in her face!
It’s only
a play-gown of homeliest cotton
She
wears, that her finer silk dress may be saved;
And happily, too,
she has wholly forgotten
The
nurse and her charge to be better behaved.
’Must a
time come when this child’s way of caring
For
only the present enjoyment shall pass;
When she’ll
learn to take thought of the dress that she’s
wearing,
And
grow rather fond of consulting the glass?
Well, never mind;
nothing really can change her;
Fair
childhood will grow to as fair maidenhood;
Her unselfish,
sweet nature is safe from all danger;
I
know she will always be charming and good.
’For when
she takes care of a still younger brother,
You
see her stop short in the midst of her mirth,
Gravely and tenderly
playing the mother:
Can
there be anything fairer on earth?
So proud of her
charge she appears, so delighted;
Of
all her perfections (indeed, they’re a host),
This loving attention
to others, united
With
naïve self-unconsciousness, charms me the most.
’What hearts
that unthinkingly under short jackets
Are
beating to-day in a wonderful wise
About racing,
or jumping, or cricket, or rackets,
One
day will beat at a smile from those eyes!
Ah, how I envy
the one that shall win her,
And
see that sweet smile no ill-humour shall damp,
Shining across
the spread table at dinner,
Or
cheerfully bright in the light of the lamp.
’Ah, little
fairy! a very short while,
Just
once or twice, in a brief country stay,
I saw you; but
when will your innocent smile
That
I keep in my mem’ry have faded away?
For when, in the
midst of my trouble and doubt,
I
remember your face with its laughter and light,
It’s as
if on a sudden the sun had shone out,
And
scattered the shadow, and made the world bright.’
CHARTREUSE.
(Liqueur.)
’Who could
refuse
Green-eyed Chartieuse?
Liquor for heretics,
Turks, Christians,
or Jews
For beggar or
queen,
For monk or for
dean;
Ripened and mellow
(The green,
not the yellow),
Give it its dues,
Gay little fellow,
Dressed up in
green!
I love thee too
well, O
Laughing Chartreuse!
’O the delicate
hues
That thrill through
the green!
Colours which
Greuze
Would die to have
seen!
With thee would
De Musset
Sweeten his muse;
Use, not abuse,
Bright little
fellow!
(The green, not
the yellow.)
O the taste and
the smell! O
Never refuse
A kiss on the
lips from
Jealous Chartreuse!’
THE LIFE-LEDGER.
’Our sufferings
we reckon o’er
With
skill minute and formal;
The cheerful ease
that fills the score
We
treat as merely normal.
Our list of ills,
how full, how great!
We
mourn our lot should fall so;
I wonder, do we
calculate
Our
happinesses also?
’Were it
not best to keep account
Of
all days, if of any?
Perhaps the dark
ones might amount
To
not so very many.
Men’s looks
are nigh as often gay
As
sad, or even solemn:
Behold, my entry
for to-day
Is
in the “happy” column.’
OCTOBER.
’The year grows old; summer’s
wild crown of roses
Has fallen and faded in the woodland ways;
On all the earth a tranquil light reposes,
Through the still dreamy days.
’The dew lies heavy in
the early morn,
On grass and mosses sparkling crystal-fair;
And shining threads of gossamer are borne
Floating upon the air,
’Across the leaf-strewn
lanes, from bough to bough
Like tissue woven in a fairy loom;
And crimson-berried bryony garlands glow
Through the leaf-tangled gloom.
’The woods are still, but
for the sudden fall
Of cupless acorns dropping to the ground,
Or rabbit plunging through the fern-stems tall,
Half-startled by the sound.
’And from the garden lawn
comes, soft and clear,
The robin’s warble from the leafless
spray,
The low sweet Angelus of the dying year,
Passing in light away.’
PROSPERITY.
’I doubt if the maxims
the Stoic adduces
Be true in the main, when they state
That our nature’s improved by adversity’s
uses,
And spoilt by a happier fate.
’The heart that is tried
by misfortune and pain,
Self-reliance and patience may learn;
Yet worn by long waiting and wishing in vain,
It often grows callous and stern.
’But the heart that is
softened by ease and contentment,
Feels warmly and kindly t’wards all;
And its charity, roused by no moody resentment,
Embraces alike great and small.
’So, although in the season
of rain-storms and showers,
The tree may strike deeper its roots,
It needs the warm brightness of sunshiny hours
To ripen the blossoms and fruits.’
Observe, not only the genuine merit
of these five pieces, but the
variety in the tones of thought: then compare
them with similar
productions of the days, say, of the once famous
L.E.L.
And what holds good of verse holds
infinitely better in respect to prose. The enormous
improvement in our prose writers (I am not speaking
of geniuses, remember, but of the generality), and
their great superiority over writers of the same class
half a century ago, is mainly due to use. Sir
Walter Scott, who, like most men of genuine power,
had great generosity, once observed to a brother author,
’You and I came just in the nick of time.’
He foresaw the formidable competition that was about
to take place, though he had no cause to fear it.
I think in these days he would have had cause; not
that I disbelieve in his genius, but that I venture
to think he diffused it over too large an area.
In such cases genius is overpassed by the talent which
husbands its resources; in other words, Nature succumbs
to second nature, as the wife in the patriarchal days
(when she grew patriarchal) succumbed to the
handmaid. And after all, though we talk so glibly
about genius, and profess to feel, though we cannot
express, in what it differs from talent, are we quite
so sure about this as we would fain persuade ourselves?
At all events, it cannot surely be contended that a
man of genius always writes like one; and when he
does not, his work is often inferior to the first-rate
production of a man of talent. For my own part,
I am not sure whether (with the exception, perhaps,
of the highest gifts of song) the whole distinction
is not fanciful.
We are ready enough in ordinary matters
to allow that ’practice makes perfect,’
and the limit of that principle is yet to be found.
Moreover, the vast importance of exclusive application
is almost unknown. We see it, indeed, in men
of science and in lawyers, but without recognition;
nay, socially, it is even quoted against them.
The mathematician may be very eminent, but we find
him dry; the lawyer may be at the head of his profession,
but we find him dull; and it is observed on all sides
how very little great A and great B, notwithstanding
the high position they have earned for themselves
in their calling, know of matters out of their own
line. On the other hand, the man of whom it was
said that ‘science was his forte and omniscience
his foible,’ has left no enduring monument behind
him; and so it must always be with mortals who have
only fifty years of thought allotted to them at the
very most, and who diffuse it. Everyone admits
the value of application, but very few are aware how
its force is wasted by diffusion: it is like a
volatile essence in a bottle without a cork.
When, on the other hand, it is concentrated you
may call it ‘narrowed’ if you please there
is hardly anything within its own sphere of action
of which it is not capable. So many high motives
(though also some mean ones) prompt us to make broad
the bases of education, that any proposal to contract
them must needs be thankless and unpopular; but it
is certain that, among the upper classes at least,
the reason why so many men are unable to make their
way in the world, is because, thanks to a too liberal
education, they are Jacks of all trades and masters
of none; and even as Jacks they cut a very poor figure.
How large and varied is the educational
bill of fare set before every young gentleman in Great
Britain; and to judge by the mental stamina it affords
him in most cases, what a waste of good food it is!
The dishes are so numerous and so quickly changed,
that he has no time to decide on which he likes best.
Like an industrious flea, rather than a bee, he hops
from flower to flower in the educational garden, without
one penny-worth of honey to show for it. And
then though I feel how degrading it is
to allude to so vulgar a matter how high
is the price of admission to the feast in question!
Its purveyors do not pretend to have filled his stomach,
but only to have put him in the way of filling it
for himself, whereas, unhappily, Paterfamilias discovers
that that is the very thing that they have not done.
His young Hopeful at twenty-one is almost as unable
to run alone as when he first entered the nursery.
To discourse airily upon the beauties of classical
education, and on the social advantages of acquiring
‘the tone’ at a public school at whatever
cost, is an agreeable exercise of the intelligence;
but such arguments have been taken too seriously,
and the result is that our young gentlemen are incapable
of gaining their own living. It is not only that
‘all the gates are thronged with suitors, all
the markets overflow,’ but even when the candidates
are so fortunate as to attain admittance, they are
still a burden upon their fathers for years, from having
had no especial preparation for the work they have
to do. Folks who can afford to spend L250 a year
on their sons at Eton or Harrow, and to add another
fifty or two for their support at the universities,
do not feel this; but those who have done it without
affording it i.e., by cutting and
contriving, if not by pinching and saving feel
their position very bitterly. There are hundreds
of clever young men who are now living at home and
doing nothing or work that pays nothing,
and even costs something for doing it who
might be earning very tolerable incomes by their pen
if they only knew how, and had not wasted their young
wits on Greek plays and Latin verses; nor do I find
that the attractions of such objects of study are
permanent, or afford the least solace to these young
gentlemen in their enforced leisure.
The idea of bringing young people
up to Literature is doubtless calculated to raise
the eyebrows almost as much as the suggestion of bringing
them up to the Stage. The notions of Paterfamilias
in this respect are very much what they were fifty
years ago. ’What! put my boy in Grub Street?
I would rather see him in his coffin.’ In
his mind’s eye he beholds Savage on his bunk
and Chatterton on his deathbed. He does not know
that there are many hundreds of persons of both sexes
who have found out this vocation for themselves, and
are diligently pursuing it under circumstances
of quite unnecessary difficulty to their
material advantage. He is unaware that the conditions
of literature in England have been as completely changed
within a single generation as those of locomotion.
There are, it is true, at present
no great prizes in literature such as are offered
by the learned professions, but there are quite as
many small ones competences; while, on
the other hand, it is not so much of a lottery.
It is not necessary to marry an attorney’s daughter,
or a bishop’s, to get on in it. The calling,
as it is termed (I know not why, for it is often heavy
enough), of ‘light literature’ is in such
contempt, through ignorance on the one hand, and arrogance
on the other, that one is almost afraid in such a
connection to speak of merit; yet merit, or, at all
events, aptitude with diligence, is certain of success
in it. A great deal has been said about editors
being blind to the worth of unknown authors; but if
so, they must be also blind (and this I have never
heard said of them) to their own interests. It
would be just as reasonable to accuse a recruiting
sergeant of passing by the stout six-feet fellows
who wish to enlist with him, and for each of whom directly
or indirectly he receives head-money.
It is possible, of course, that one particular sergeant
may be drunken, or careless of his own interests,
but in that case the literary recruit has only to apply
next door. The opportunities for action in the
field of literature are now so very numerous that
it is impossible that any able volunteer should be
long shut out of it; and I have observed that the complaints
about want of employment come almost solely from those
unfit for service. Nay, in the ranks of the literaryarmy
there are very many who should have been excluded.
Few, if any, are there through favour; but the fact
is, the work to be done is so extensive and so varied,
that there is not a sufficiency of good candidates
to do it. And of what is called ‘skilled
labour’ among them there is scarcely any.
The question ‘What can you do?’
put by an editor to an aspirant, generally astonishes
him very much. The aspirant is ready to do anything,
he says, which the other will please to suggest.
’But what is your line in literature? What
can you do best not tragedies in blank
verse, I hope?’ Perhaps the aspirant here hangs
his head; he has written tragedies. In
which case there is good hope for him, because it
shows a natural bent. But he generally replies
that he has written nothing as yet except that essay
on the genius of Cicero (at which the editor has already
shaken his head), and that defence of Mary Queen of
Scots. Or perhaps he has written some translations
of Horace, which he is surprised to find not a novelty;
or some considerations upon the value of a feudal
system. At four-and-twenty, in short, he is but
an overgrown schoolboy. He has been taught, indeed,
to acquire knowledge of a certain sort, but not the
habit of acquiring; he has been taught to observe
nothing; he is ignorant upon all the subjects that
interest his fellow-creatures, and in his new ambition
is like one who endeavours to attract an audience
without having anything to tell them. He knows
some Latin, a little Greek, a very little French,
and a very very little of what are called the English
classics. He has read a few recent novels perhaps,
but of modern English literature, and of that (to him
at least) most important branch of it, English journalism,
he knows nothing. His views and opinions are
those of a public school, which are by no means in
accordance with those of the great world of readers;
or he is full of the class prejudices imbibed at college.
In short, he may be as vigorous as a Zulu, with the
materials of a first-rate soldier in him, but his
arms are only a club and an assegai, and are of no
service. Why should he not be fitted out in early
life with literary weapons of precision, and taught
the use of them?
I say, again, that poor Paterfamilias
looking hopelessly about him, like Quintus Curtius
in the riddle, for ‘a nice opening for a young
man,’ is totally ignorant of the opportunities,
if not for fame and fortune, at least for competency
and comfort, that Literature now offers to a clever
lad. He looks round him; he sees the Church leading
nowhere, with much greater certainty of expense than
income, and demanding a huge sum for what is irreverently
termed ‘gate money;’ he sees the Bar, with
its high road leading indeed to the woolsack, but
with a hundred by-ways leading nowhere in particular,
and full of turnpikes legal tutors, legal
fees, rents of chambers, etc. which
he has to defray; he sees Physic, at which Materfamilias
sniffs and turns her nose up. ’Her Jack,
with such agreeable manners, to become a saw-bones!
Never!’ He sees the army, and thinks, since
Jack has such great abilities, it seems a pity to give
him a red coat, which costs also considerably more
than a black one; And how is Jack to live upon his
pay?
After all, indeed, however prettily
one puts it, the question is with him, not so much
‘What is my Jack to be?’ as ’How
is my Jack to live?’ To one who has any gift
of humour there are few things more amusing than to
observe how this vulgar, but really rather important
inquiry, is ignored by those who take the subject of
modern education in hand. They are chiefly schoolmasters,
who are not so deep in their books but that they can
spare a glance or two in the direction of their banker’s
account; or fellows of colleges who have no children,
and therefore never feel the difficulties of supporting
them. Heaven forbid that so humble an individual
as myself should question their wisdom, or say anything
about them that should seem to smack of irreverence;
but I do believe that (with one or two exceptions
I have in my mind) the system they have introduced
among us is the Greatest Humbug in the universe.
In the meantime poor Paterfamilias (who is the last
man, they flatter themselves, to find this out) stands
with his hands (and very little else) in his pockets,
regarding his clever offspring, and wondering what
he shall do with him. He remembers to have read
about a man on his deathbed, who calls his children
about him and thanks God, though he has left them
nothing to live upon, he has given them a good education,
and tries to extract comfort from the reminiscence.
That he has spent money enough upon Jack’s education
is certain; something between two or three thousand
pounds in all at least, the interest of which, it
strikes him, would be very convenient just now to keep
him. But unfortunately the principal is gone
and Jack isn’t.
Now suppose for one may
suppose anything, however ridiculous he
had spent two or three hundred pounds at the very
most, and brought him up to the Calling of Literature.
He believes, perhaps, that it is only geniuses that
succeed in it (in which case I know more geniuses than
I had any idea of), and he doesn’t think Jack
a genius, though Jack’s mother does. Or,
as is more probable, he regards it as a hand-to-mouth
calling, which to-day gives its disciples a five-pound
note, and to-morrow five pence. He calls to mind
a saying about Literature being a good stick, but
not a good crutch an excellent auxiliary,
but no permanent support; but he forgets the all-important
fact that the remark was made half a century ago.
Poor blind Paterfamilias shall
I couch you? If the operation is successful,
I am sure you will thank me for it; but, on the other
hand, I foresee I shall incur the greatest enmities.
Should I encourage clever Jack, and, what is worse,
a thousand Jacks who are not clever, to enter upon
this vocation, what will editors say to me? I
shall have to go about, perhaps, guarded with two
policemen with revolvers, like an Irish gentleman
on his landed estate. ’Is not the flood
of rubbish to which we are already subjected,’
I hear them crying, ’bad enough, without your
pulling up the sluices of universal stupidity?’
My suggestion, however, is intended to benefit them
by clearing away the rubbish, and inducing a clearer
and deeper stream for the turning of their mills.
At the same time I confess that the lessening of Paterfamilias’s
difficulties is my main object. What I would
open his eyes to is the fact that a calling, of the
advantages of which he has no knowledge, does
present itself to clever Jack, which will cost him
nothing but pens, ink, and paper to enter upon, and
in which, if he has been well trained for it, he will
surely be successful, since so many succeed in it without
any training at all. Why should not clever Jack
have this in view as much as the ignes fatui
of woolsacks and mitres? If it has no lord
chancellorships, it has plenty of county court appointments;
if it has no bishoprics, it has plenty of bénéfices and
really, as times go, some pretty fat ones.
On your breakfast-table, good Paterfamilias,
there lies, every morning, a newspaper, and on Saturday
perhaps there are two or three. When you go out
in the street, you are pestered to buy half a score
more of them. In your club reading-room there
are a hundred different journals. When you travel
by the railway you see at every station a provincial
newspaper of more or less extensive circulation.
Has it never struck you that to supply these publications
with their leading articles, there must be an immense
staff of persons called journalists, professing every
description of opinion, and advocating every conceivable
policy? And do you suppose these gentry only
get L70 a year for their work, like a curate; or L60,
like a sub-lieutenant; or that they have to pay three
times those sums for the privilege of belonging to
the press, as a barrister does for belonging to his
inn? Again, in London at least, there are as
many magazines as newspapers, containing every kind
of literature, the very contributors of which are
so numerous, that they form a public of themselves.
That seems at the first blush to militate against
my suggestion, but though contributors are so common,
and upon the whole so good indeed, considering
the conditions under which they labour, so wonderfully
good they are not (I have heard editors
say) so good as they might be, supposing (for example)
they knew a little of science, history, politics,
English literature, and especially of the art of composition,
before they volunteered their services. At present
the ranks of journalistic and periodical literature
are largely recruited from the failures in other professions.
The bright young barrister who can’t get a brief
takes to literature as a calling, just as the man
who has ‘gone a cropper’ in the army takes
to the wine-trade. And what aeons of time, and
what millions of money, have been wasted in the meanwhile!
The announcement written on the gates
of all the recognised professions in England is the
same that would-be travellers read on the faces of
the passengers on the underground railway after office
hours: ’Our number is complete, and our
room is limited.’ In literature, on the
contrary, though its vehicles may seem as tightly
packed, substitution can be effected. There may
be persons travelling on that line in the first-class
who ought to be in the third, and indeed have no reasonable
pretext for being there at all. And if clever
Jack could show his ticket, he would turn them out
of it.
Again, so far from the space being
limited, it is continually enlarging, and that out
of all proportion to those who have tickets. We
hear from its enemies that the Church is doomed, and
from its friends that it is in danger; there is a
small but energetic party who are bent on reducing
the Army, and even on doing away with it; nay, so wicked
and presumptuous has human nature grown, that mutterings
are heard and menaces uttered against the delay and
exactions of the Law itself; whereas Literature has
no foes, and is enlarging its boundaries in all directions.
It is all ‘a-growing and a-blowing,’ as
the peripatetic gardeners say of their plants; but,
unlike their wares, it has its roots deep in the soil
and is an evergreen. Its promise is golden, and
its prospects are boundless for every class of writer.
In some excellent articles on Modern
Literature in Blackwood’s Magazine the
other day, this subject was touched upon with respect
to fiction, and might well have filled a greater space,
for the growth of that description of literature of
late years is simply marvellous. Curiously enough,
though France originated the feuilleton, it
was from America and our own colonies that England
seems to have taken the idea of publishing novels
in newspapers. It was a common practice in Australia
long before we adopted it; and, what is also curious,
it was first acclimatised among us by our provincial
papers. The custom is rapidly gaining ground
in London, but in the country there is now scarcely
any newspaper of repute which does not enlist the aid
of fiction to attract its readers. Many of them
are contented with very poor stuff, for which they
pay a proportional price; but others club together
with other newspapers the operation has
even received the technical term of ’forming
a syndicate’ and are thereby enabled
to secure the services of popular authors; while the
newspapers thus arranged for are published at a good
distance from one another, so as not to interfere
with each other’s circulation. Country journals,
which are not so ambitious, instead of using an inferior
article, will often purchase the ‘serial right,’
as it is called, of stories which have already appeared
elsewhere, or have passed through the circulating
libraries. Nay, the novelist who has established
a reputation has many more strings to his bow:
his novel, thus published in the country newspapers,
also appears coincidently in the same serial shape
in Australia, Canada, and other British colonies,
leaving the three-volume form and the cheap editions
‘to the good.’ And what is true of
fiction is in a less degree true of other kinds of
literature. Travels are ‘gutted,’
and form articles in magazines, illustrated by the
original plates; lectures, after having served their
primary purpose, are published in a similar manner;
even scientific works now appear first in the magazines
which are devoted to science before performing their
mission of ‘popularising’ their subject.
When speaking of the growth of readers,
I have purposely not mentioned America. For the
present the absence of copyright there is destroying
both author and publisher; but the wheels of justice,
though tardy, are making way there. In a few
years that great continent of readers will be legitimately
added to the audience of the English author, and those
that have stolen will steal no more.
Nor, in our own country, must we fail
to take notice of the establishment of School Boards.
A generation hence we shall have a reading public
almost as numerous as in America; even the very lowest
classes will have acquired a certain culture which
will beget demands both for journalists and ‘literary
persons.’ The harvest will be plenteous
indeed, but unless my advice be followed in some shape
or another, the labourers will be comparatively few
and superlatively inadequate.
I am well aware how mischievous, as
well as troublesome, would be the encouragement of
mediocrity; and in stating these promising facts I
have no such purpose in my mind. On the contrary,
there is an immense amount of mediocrity already in
literature, which I think my proposition of training
up ‘clever Jack’ to that calling would
discourage. I have no expectation of establishing
a manufactory for genius and indeed, for
reasons it is not necessary to specify, I would not
do it if I could. But whereas all kinds of ‘culture’
have been recommended to the youth of Great Britain
(and certainly with no limit as to the expense of
acquisition), the cultivation of such natural faculties
as imagination and humour (for example) has never
been suggested. The possibility of such a thing
will doubtless be denied. I am quite certain,
however, that they are capable of great development,
and that they may be brought to attain, if not perfection,
at all events a high degree of excellence. The
proof, to those who choose to look for it, is plain
enough even as matters stand. Use and opportunity
are already producing scores of examples of it; if
supplemented by early education they might surely
produce still more.
There is so great and general a prejudice
against special studies, that I must humbly conclude
there is something in it. On the other hand, I
know a large number of highly that is broadly educated
persons, who are desperately dull. ‘But
would they have been less dull,’ it may be asked,
‘if they were also ignorant?’ Yes, I believe
they would. They have swallowed too much for
digestions naturally weak; they have become inert,
conceited, oppressive to themselves and others Prigs.
And I think that even clever young people suffer in
a less degree from the same cause. Some one has
written, ‘Information is always useful.’
This reminds me of the married lady, fond of bargains,
who once bought a door-plate at a sale with ‘Mr.
Wilkins’ on it. Her own name was Jones,
but the doorplate was very cheap, and her husband,
she argued, might die, and then she might marry
a man of the name of Wilkins. ’Depend upon
it, everything comes in useful,’ she said, ’if
you only keep it long enough.’
This is what I venture to doubt.
I have myself purchased several door-plates (quite
as burthensome, but not so cheap as that good lady’s),
which have been of no sort of use to me, and are still
on hand.