The profession of letters has been lately debated in the public prints;
and it has been debated, to put the matter mildly, from a point of view
that was calculated to surprise high-minded men, and bring a general
contempt on books and reading. Some time ago, in particular, a lively,
pleasant, popular writer {47b} devoted an essay, lively and pleasant like
himself, to a very encouraging view of the profession. We may be glad
that his experience is so cheering, and we may hope that all others, who
deserve it, shall be as handsomely rewarded; but I do not think we need
be at all glad to have this question, so important to the public and
ourselves, debated solely on the ground of money. The salary in any
business under heaven is not the only, nor indeed the first, question.
That you should continue to exist is a matter for your own consideration;
but that your business should be first honest, and second useful, are
points in which honour and morality are concerned. If the writer to whom
I refer succeeds in persuading a number of young persons to adopt this
way of life with an eye set singly on the livelihood, we must expect them
in their works to follow profit only, and we must expect in consequence,
if he will pardon me the epithets, a slovenly, base, untrue, and empty
literature. Of that writer himself I am not speaking: he is diligent,
clean, and pleasing; we all owe him periods of entertainment, and he has
achieved an amiable popularity which he has adequately deserved. But the
truth is, he does not, or did not when he first embraced it, regard his
profession from this purely mercenary side. He went into it, I shall
venture to say, if not with any noble design, at least in the ardour of a
first love; and he enjoyed its practice long before he paused to
calculate the wage. The other day an author was complimented on a piece
of work, good in itself and exceptionally good for him, and replied, in
terms unworthy of a commercial traveller that as the book was not briskly
selling he did not give a copper farthing for its merit. It must not be
supposed that the person to whom this answer was addressed received it as
a profession of faith; he knew, on the other hand, that it was only a
whiff of irritation; just as we know, when a respectable writer talks of
literature as a way of life, like shoemaking, but not so useful, that he
is only debating one aspect of a question, and is still clearly conscious
of a dozen others more important in themselves and more central to the
matter in hand. But while those who treat literature in this penny-wise
and virtue-foolish spirit are themselves truly in possession of a better
light, it does not follow that the treatment is decent or improving,
whether for themselves or others. To treat all subjects in the highest,
the most honourable, and the pluckiest spirit, consistent with the fact,
is the first duty of a writer. If he be well paid, as I am glad to hear
he is, this duty becomes the more urgent, the neglect of it the more
disgraceful. And perhaps there is no subject on which a man should speak
so gravely as that industry, whatever it may be, which is the occupation
or delight of his life; which is his tool to earn or serve with; and
which, if it be unworthy, stamps himself as a mere incubus of dumb and
greedy bowels on the shoulders of labouring humanity. On that subject
alone even to force the note might lean to virtue’s side. It is to be
hoped that a numerous and enterprising generation of writers will follow
and surpass the present one; but it would be better if the stream were
stayed, and the roll of our old, honest English books were closed, than
that esurient book-makers should continue and debase a brave tradition,
and lower, in their own eyes, a famous race. Better that our serene
temples were deserted than filled with trafficking and juggling priests.
There are two just reasons for the choice of any way of life: the first
is inbred taste in the chooser; the second some high utility in the
industry selected. Literature, like any other art, is singularly
interesting to the artist; and, in a degree peculiar to itself among the
arts, it is useful to mankind. These are the sufficient justifications
for any young man or woman who adopts it as the business of his life. I
shall not say much about the wages. A writer can live by his writing.
If not so luxuriously as by other trades, then less luxuriously. The
nature of the work he does all day will more affect his happiness than
the quality of his dinner at night. Whatever be your calling, and
however much it brings you in the year, you could still, you know, get
more by cheating. We all suffer ourselves to be too much concerned about
a little poverty; but such considerations should not move us in the
choice of that which is to be the business and justification of so great
a portion of our lives; and like the missionary, the patriot, or the
philosopher, we should all choose that poor and brave career in which we
can do the most and best for mankind. Now Nature, faithfully followed,
proves herself a careful mother. A lad, for some liking to the jingle of
words, betakes himself to letters for his life; by-and-by, when he learns
more gravity, he finds that he has chosen better than he knew; that if he
earns little, he is earning it amply; that if he receives a small wage,
he is in a position to do considerable services; that it is in his power,
in some small measure, to protect the oppressed and to defend the truth.
So kindly is the world arranged, such great profit may arise from a small
degree of human reliance on oneself, and such, in particular, is the
happy star of this trade of writing, that it should combine pleasure and
profit to both parties, and be at once agreeable, like fiddling, and
useful, like good preaching.
This is to speak of literature at its highest; and with the four great
elders who are still spared to our respect and admiration, with Carlyle,
Ruskin, Browning, and Tennyson before us, it would be cowardly to
consider it at first in any lesser aspect. But while we cannot follow
these athletes, while we may none of us, perhaps, be very vigorous, very
original, or very wise, I still contend that, in the humblest sort of
literary work, we have it in our power either to do great harm or great
good. We may seek merely to please; we may seek, having no higher gift,
merely to gratify the idle nine days’ curiosity of our contemporaries; or
we may essay, however feebly, to instruct. In each of these we shall
have to deal with that remarkable art of words which, because it is the
dialect of life, comes home so easily and powerfully to the minds of men;
and since that is so, we contribute, in each of these branches, to build
up the sum of sentiments and appreciations which goes by the name of
Public Opinion or Public Feeling. The total of a nation’s reading, in
these days of daily papers, greatly modifies the total of the nation’s
speech; and the speech and reading, taken together, form the efficient
educational medium of youth. A good man or woman may keep a youth some
little while in clearer air; but the contemporary atmosphere is
all-powerful in the end on the average of mediocre characters. The
copious Corinthian baseness of the American reporter or the Parisian
_chroniquear_, both so lightly readable, must exercise an incalculable
influence for ill; they touch upon all subjects, and on all with the same
ungenerous hand; they begin the consideration of all, in young and
unprepared minds, in an unworthy spirit; on all, they supply some
pungency for dull people to quote. The mere body of this ugly matter
overwhelms the rare utterances of good men; the sneering, the selfish,
and the cowardly are scattered in broad sheets on every table, while the
antidote, in small volumes, lies unread upon the shelf. I have spoken of
the American and the French, not because they are so much baser, but so
much more readable, than the English; their evil is done more
effectively, in America for the masses, in French for the few that care
to read; but with us as with them, the duties of literature are daily
neglected, truth daily perverted and suppressed, and grave subjects daily
degraded in the treatment. The journalist is not reckoned an important
officer; yet judge of the good he might do, the harm he does; judge of it
by one instance only: that when we find two journals on the reverse sides
of politics each, on the same day, openly garbling a piece of news for
the interest of its own party, we smile at the discovery (no discovery
now!) as over a good joke and pardonable stratagem. Lying so open is
scarce lying, it is true; but one of the things that we profess to teach
our young is a respect for truth; and I cannot think this piece of
education will be crowned with any great success, so long as some of us
practise and the rest openly approve of public falsehood.
There are two duties incumbent upon any man who enters on the business of
writing: truth to the fact and a good spirit in the treatment. In every
department of literature, though so low as hardly to deserve the name,
truth to the fact is of importance to the education and comfort of
mankind, and so hard to preserve, that the faithful trying to do so will
lend some dignity to the man who tries it. Our judgments are based upon
two things: first, upon the original preferences of our soul; but,
second, upon the mass of testimony to the nature of God, man, and the
universe which reaches us, in divers manners, from without. For the most
part these divers manners are reducible to one, all that we learn of past
times and much that we learn of our own reaching us through the medium of
books or papers, and even he who cannot read learning from the same
source at second-hand and by the report of him who can. Thus the sum of
the contemporary knowledge or ignorance of good and evil is, in large
measure, the handiwork of those who write. Those who write have to see
that each man’s knowledge is, as near as they can make it, answerable to
the facts of life; that he shall not suppose himself an angel or a
monster; nor take this world for a hell; nor be suffered to imagine that
all rights are concentred in his own caste or country, or all veracities
in his own parochial creed. Each man should learn what is within him,
that he may strive to mend; he must be taught what is without him, that
he may be kind to others. It can never be wrong to tell him the truth;
for, in his disputable state, weaving as he goes his theory of life,
steering himself, cheering or reproving others, all facts are of the
first importance to his conduct; and even if a fact shall discourage or
corrupt him, it is still best that he should know it; for it is in this
world as it is, and not in a world made easy by educational suppressions,
that he must win his way to shame or glory. In one word, it must always
be foul to tell what is false; and it can never be safe to suppress what
is true. The very fact that you omit may be the fact which somebody was
wanting, for one man’s meat is another man’s poison, and I have known a
person who was cheered by the perusal of _Candide_. Every fact is a part
of that great puzzle we must set together; and none that comes directly
in a writer’s path but has some nice relations, unperceivable by him, to
the totality and bearing of the subject under hand. Yet there are
certain classes of fact eternally more necessary than others, and it is
with these that literature must first bestir itself. They are not hard
to distinguish, nature once more easily leading us; for the necessary,
because the efficacious, facts are those which are most interesting to
the natural mind of man. Those which are coloured, picturesque, human,
and rooted in morality, and those, on the other hand, which are clear,
indisputable, and a part of science, are alone vital in importance,
seizing by their interest, or useful to communicate. So far as the
writer merely narrates, he should principally tell of these. He should
tell of the kind and wholesome and beautiful elements of our life; he
should tell unsparingly of the evil and sorrow of the present, to move us
with instances: he should tell of wise and good people in the past, to
excite us by example; and of these he should tell soberly and truthfully,
not glossing faults, that we may neither grow discouraged with ourselves
nor exacting to our neighbours. So the body of contemporary literature,
ephemeral and feeble in itself, touches in the minds of men the springs
of thought and kindness, and supports them (for those who will go at all
are easily supported) on their way to what is true and right. And if, in
any degree, it does so now, how much more might it do so if the writers
chose! There is not a life in all the records of the past but, properly
studied, might lend a hint and a help to some contemporary. There is not
a juncture in to-day’s affairs but some useful word may yet be said of
it. Even the reporter has an office, and, with clear eyes and honest
language, may unveil injustices and point the way to progress. And for a
last word: in all narration there is only one way to be clever, and that
is to be exact. To be vivid is a secondary quality which must presuppose
the first; for vividly to convey a wrong impression is only to make
failure conspicuous.
But a fact may be viewed on many sides; it may be chronicled with rage,
tears, laughter, indifference, or admiration, and by each of these the
story will be transformed to something else. The newspapers that told of
the return of our representatives from Berlin, even if they had not
differed as to the facts, would have sufficiently differed by their
spirits; so that the one description would have been a second ovation,
and the other a prolonged insult. The subject makes but a trifling part
of any piece of literature, and the view of the writer is itself a fact
more important because less disputable than the others. Now this spirit
in which a subject is regarded, important in all kinds of literary work,
becomes all-important in works of fiction, meditation, or rhapsody; for
there it not only colours but itself chooses the facts; not only modifies
but shapes the work. And hence, over the far larger proportion of the
field of literature, the health or disease of the writer’s mind or
momentary humour forms not only the leading feature of his work, but is,
at bottom, the only thing he can communicate to others. In all works of
art, widely speaking, it is first of all the author’s attitude that is
narrated, though in the attitude there be implied a whole experience and
a theory of life. An author who has begged the question and reposes in
some narrow faith cannot, if he would, express the whole or even many of
the sides of this various existence; for, his own life being maim, some
of them are not admitted in his theory, and were only dimly and
unwillingly recognised in his experience. Hence the smallness, the
triteness, and the inhumanity in works of merely sectarian religion; and
hence we find equal although unsimilar limitation in works inspired by
the spirit of the flesh or the despicable taste for high society. So
that the first duty of any man who is to write is intellectual.
Designedly or not, he has so far set himself up for a leader of the minds
of men; and he must see that his own mind is kept supple, charitable, and
bright. Everything but prejudice should find a voice through him; he
should see the good in all things; where he has even a fear that he does
not wholly understand, there he should be wholly silent; and he should
recognise from the first that he has only one tool in his workshop, and
that tool is sympathy. {64}
The second duty, far harder to define, is moral. There are a thousand
different humours in the mind, and about each of them, when it is
uppermost, some literature tends to be deposited. Is this to be allowed?
Not certainly in every case, and yet perhaps in more than rigourists
would fancy. It were to be desired that all literary work, and chiefly
works of art, issued from sound, human, healthy, and potent impulses,
whether grave or laughing, humorous, romantic, or religious.
Yet it cannot be denied that some valuable books are partially insane;
some, mostly religious, partially inhuman; and very many tainted with
morbidity and impotence. We do not loathe a masterpiece although we gird
against its blemishes. We are not, above all, to look for faults, but
merits. There is no book perfect, even in design; but there are many
that will delight, improve, or encourage the reader. On the one hand,
the Hebrew psalms are the only religious poetry on earth; yet they
contain sallies that savour rankly of the man of blood. On the other
hand, Alfred de Musset had a poisoned and a contorted nature; I am only
quoting that generous and frivolous giant, old Dumas, when I accuse him
of a bad heart; yet, when the impulse under which he wrote was purely
creative, he could give us works like _Carmosine_ or _Fantasio_, in which
the last note of the romantic comedy seems to have been found again to
touch and please us. When Flaubert wrote _Madame Bovary_, I believe he
thought chiefly of a somewhat morbid realism; and behold! the book turned
in his hands into a masterpiece of appalling morality. But the truth is,
when books are conceived under a great stress, with a soul of ninefold
power, nine times heated and electrified by effort, the conditions of our
being are seized with such an ample grasp, that, even should the main
design be trivial or base, some truth and beauty cannot fail to be
expressed. Out of the strong comes forth sweetness; but an ill thing
poorly done is an ill thing top and bottom. And so this can be no
encouragement to knock-kneed, feeble-wristed scribes, who must take their
business conscientiously or be ashamed to practise it.
Man is imperfect; yet, in his literature, he must express himself and his
own views and preferences; for to do anything else is to do a far more
perilous thing than to risk being immoral: it is to be sure of being
untrue. To ape a sentiment, even a good one, is to travesty a sentiment;
that will not be helpful. To conceal a sentiment, if you are sure you
hold it, is to take a liberty with truth. There is probably no point of
view possible to a sane man but contains some truth and, in the true
connection, might be profitable to the race. I am not afraid of the
truth, if any one could tell it me, but I am afraid of parts of it
impertinently uttered. There is a time to dance and a time to mourn; to
be harsh as well as to be sentimental; to be ascetic as well as to
glorify the appetites; and if a man were to combine all these extremes
into his work, each in its place and proportion, that work would be the
world’s masterpiece of morality as well as of art. Partiality is
immorality; for any book is wrong that gives a misleading picture of the
world and life. The trouble is that the weakling must be partial; the
work of one proving dank and depressing; of another, cheap and vulgar; of
a third, epileptically sensual; of a fourth, sourly ascetic. In
literature as in conduct, you can never hope to do exactly right. All
you can do is to make as sure as possible; and for that there is but one
rule. Nothing should be done in a hurry that can be done slowly. It is
no use to write a book and put it by for nine or even ninety years; for
in the writing you will have partly convinced yourself; the delay must
precede any beginning; and if you meditate a work of art, you should
first long roll the subject under the tongue to make sure you like the
flavour, before you brew a volume that shall taste of it from end to end;
or if you propose to enter on the field of controversy, you should first
have thought upon the question under all conditions, in health as well as
in sickness, in sorrow as well as in joy. It is this nearness of
examination necessary for any true and kind writing, that makes the
practice of the art a prolonged and noble education for the writer.
There is plenty to do, plenty to say, or to say over again, in the
meantime. Any literary work which conveys faithful facts or pleasing
impressions is a service to the public. It is even a service to be
thankfully proud of having rendered. The slightest novels are a blessing
to those in distress, not chloroform itself a greater. Our fine old
sea-captain’s life was justified when Carlyle soothed his mind with _The
King’s Own_ or _Newton Forster_. To please is to serve; and so far from
its being difficult to instruct while you amuse, it is difficult to do
the one thoroughly without the other. Some part of the writer or his
life will crop out in even a vapid book; and to read a novel that was
conceived with any force is to multiply experience and to exercise the
sympathies.
Every article, every piece of verse, every essay, every _entre-filet_, is
destined to pass, however swiftly, through the minds of some portion of
the public, and to colour, however transiently, their thoughts. When any
subject falls to be discussed, some scribbler on a paper has the
invaluable opportunity of beginning its discussion in a dignified and
human spirit; and if there were enough who did so in our public press,
neither the public nor the Parliament would find it in their minds to
drop to meaner thoughts. The writer has the chance to stumble, by the
way, on something pleasing, something interesting, something encouraging,
were it only to a single reader. He will be unfortunate, indeed, if he
suit no one. He has the chance, besides, to stumble on something that a
dull person shall be able to comprehend; and for a dull person to have
read anything and, for that once, comprehended it, makes a marking epoch
in his education.
Here, then, is work worth doing and worth trying to do well. And so, if
I were minded to welcome any great accession to our trade, it should not
be from any reason of a higher wage, but because it was a trade which was
useful in a very great and in a very high degree; which every honest
tradesman could make more serviceable to mankind in his single strength;
which was difficult to do well and possible to do better every year;
which called for scrupulous thought on the part of all who practised it,
and hence became a perpetual education to their nobler natures; and
which, pay it as you please, in the large majority of the best cases will
still be underpaid. For surely, at this time of day in the nineteenth
century, there is nothing that an honest man should fear more timorously
than getting and spending more than he deserves.