“Ah!” he replied, “very good! I see how it is—say no more!
Touching this matter of compensation, what you observe is very
just: in fact it is excessively so. But ah—ah—the _first_
contribution—the _first_, I say,—it is never the Magazine custom
to pay for—you comprehend, eh? The truth is, we are usually the
_recipients_ in such case.” [Mr. Crab smiled blandly as he
emphasized the word “recipients.”] “For the most part, we are
_paid_ for the insertion of a maiden attempt—especially in verse.
In the second place, Mr. Bob, the Magazine rule is never to
disburse what we term in France the _argent comptant_—I have no
doubt you understand. In a quarter or two after publication of
the article—or in a year or two—we make no objection to giving
our note at nine months; provided always that we can so arrange
our affairs as to be quite certain of a ‘burst up’ in six. I
really _do_ hope, Mr. Bob, that you will look upon this
explanation as satisfactory.” Here Mr. Crab concluded, and the
tears stood in his eyes.
Grieved to the soul at having been, however innocently, the cause
of pain to so eminent and so sensitive a man, I hastened to
apologize, and to reassure him, by expressing my perfect
coincidence with his views, as well as my entire appreciation of
the delicacy of his position. Having done all this in a neat
speech, I took leave.
One fine morning, very shortly afterwards, “I awoke and found
myself famous.” The extent of my renown will be best estimated by
reference to the editorial opinions of the day. These opinions,
it will be seen, were embodied in critical notices of the number
of the “Lollipop” containing my poem, and are perfectly
satisfactory, conclusive and clear with the exception, perhaps,
of the hieroglyphical marks, “_Sep_. 15—1 t.” appended to each of
the critiques.
The “Owl,” a journal of profound sagacity, and well known for the
deliberate gravity of its literary decisions—the “Owl,” I say,
spoke as follows:
“‘The Lollipop!’ The October number of this delicious Magazine
surpasses its predecessors, and sets competition at defiance. In
the beauty of its typography and paper—in the number and
excellence of its steel plates—as well as in the literary merit
of its contributions—the ‘Lollipop’ compares with its slow-paced
rivals as Hyperion with a Satyr. The ‘Hum-Drum,’ the ‘Rowdy-Dow,’
and the ‘Goosetherumfoodle,’ excel, it is true, in braggadocio,
but, in all other points, give us the ‘Lollipop!’ How this
celebrated journal can sustain its evidently tremendous expenses,
is more than we can understand. To be sure, it has a circulation
of 100,000, and its subscription-list has increased one-fourth
during the last month; but, on the other hand, the sums it
disburses constantly for contributions are inconceivable. It is
reported that Mr. Slyass received no less than thirty-seven and a
half cents for his inimitable paper on ‘Pigs.’ With Mr. Crab, as
editor, and with such names upon the list of contributors as Snob
and Slyass, there can be no such word as ‘fail’ for the
Lollipop.’ Go and subscribe. _Sep_. 15—1 _t.”_
I must say that I was gratified with this high-toned notice from
a paper so respectable as the “Owl.” The placing my name—that is
to say, my _nom de guerre_—in priority of station to that of the
great Slyass, was a compliment as happy as I felt it to be
deserved.
My attention was next arrested by these paragraphs in the
“Toad”—a print highly distinguished for its uprightness, and
independence—for its entire freedom from sycophancy and
subservience to the givers of dinners:
“The ‘Lollipop’ for October is out in advance of all its
contemporaries, and infinitely surpasses them, of course, in the
splendor of its embellishments, as well as in the richness of its
literary contents. The ‘Hum-Drum,’ the ‘Rowdy-Dow,’ and the
‘Goosetherumfoodle’ excel, we admit, in braggadocio, but, in all
other points, give us the ‘Lollipop. How this celebrated Magazine
can sustain its evidently tremendous expenses, is more than we
can understand. To be sure, it has a circulation of 200,000, and
its subscription list has increased one-third during the last
fortnight, but on the other hand, the sums it disburses, monthly,
for contributions, are fearfully great. We learn that Mr.
Mumblethumb received no less than fifty cents for his late
‘Monody in a Mud-Puddle.’
“Among the original contributors to the present number we notice,
(besides the eminent editor, Mr. Crab,) such men as Snob, Slyass,
and Mumblethumb. Apart from the editorial matter, the most
valuable paper, nevertheless, is, we think, a poetical gem by
Snob, on the ‘Oil-of-Bob’—but our readers must not suppose from
the title of this incomparable _bijou_, that it bears any
similitude to some balderdash on the same subject by a certain
contemptible individual whose name is unmentionable to ears
polite. The present poem ‘On the Oil-of-Bob,’ has excited
universal anxiety and curiosity in respect to the owner of the
evident pseudonym, ‘Snob’—a curiosity which, happily, we have it
in our power to satisfy. ‘Snob’ is the nom de plume of Mr.
Thingum Bob, of this city,—a relative of the great Mr. Thingum,
(after whom he is named,) and otherwise connected with the most
illustrious families of the State. His father, Thomas Bob, Esq.,
is an opulent merchant in Smug. _Sep_. 15—1 _t.”_
This generous approbation touched me to the heart—the more
especially as it emanated from a source so avowedly—so
proverbially pure as the “Toad.” The word “balderdash,” as
applied to the “Oil-of-Bob” of the Fly, I considered singularly
pungent and appropriate. The words “gem” and “_bijou_,” however,
used in reference to my composition, struck me as being, in some
degree, feeble, and seemed to me to be deficient in force. They
were not sufficiently _prononcés_, (as we have it in France).
I had hardly finished reading the “Toad,” when a friend placed in
my hands a copy of the “Mole,” a daily, enjoying high reputation
for the keenness of its perception about matters in general, and
for the open, honest, above-ground style of its editorials. The
“Mole” spoke of the “Lollipop” as follows:
“We have just received the ‘Lollipop’ for October, and must say
that never before have we perused any single number of any
periodical which afforded us a felicity so supreme. We speak
advisedly. The ‘Hum-Drum,’ the ‘Rowdy-Dow’ and the
‘Goosetherumfoodle’ must look well to their laurels. These
prints, no doubt, surpass every thing in loudness of pretension,
but, in all other points, give us the ‘Lollipop!’ How this
celebrated Magazine can sustain its evidently tremendous
expenses, is more than we can comprehend. To be sure, it has a
circulation of 300,000 and its subscription-list has increased
one-half within the last week, but then the sum it disburses,
monthly, for contributions, is astoundingly enormous. We have it
upon good authority, that Mr. Fatquack received no less than
sixty-two cents and a half for his late domestic nouvelette, the
‘Dish-Clout.’
“The contributors to the number before us are Mr. Crab, (the
eminent editor,) Snob, Mumblethumb, Fatquack, and others; but,
after the inimitable compositions of the editor himself, we
prefer a diamond-like effusion from the pen of a rising poet who
writes over the signature ‘Snob’—a nom de guerre which we predict
will one day extinguish the radiance of ‘Boz.’ ‘Snob,’ we learn,
is a Mr. Thingum Bob, Esq., sole heir of a wealthy merchant of
this city, Thomas Bob, Esq., and a near relative of the
distinguished Mr. Thingum. The title of Mr. B.‘s admirable poem
is the ‘Oil-of-Bob’—a somewhat unfortunate name, by-the-by, as
some contemptible vagabond connected with the penny press has
already disgusted the town with a great deal of drivel upon the
same topic. There will be no danger, however, of confounding the
compositions. Sep. 15—1 t.”
The generous approbation of so clear-sighted a journal as the
“Mole” penetrated my soul with delight. The only objection which
occurred to me was, that the terms “contemptible vagabond” might
have been better written “_odious and_ contemptible _wretch,
villain and_ vagabond.” This would have sounded more gracefully,
I think. “Diamond-like,” also, was scarcely, it will be admitted,
of sufficient intensity to express what the “Mole” evidently
_thought_ of the brilliancy of the “Oil-of-Bob.”
On the same afternoon in which I saw these notices in the “Owl,”
the “Toad,” and the “Mole” I happened to meet with a copy of the
“Daddy-Long-Legs,” a periodical proverbial for the extreme extent
of its understanding. And it was the “Daddy-Long-Legs” which
spoke thus:
“The ‘Lollipop!!’ This gorgeous magazine is already before the
public for October. The question of preeminence is forever put to
rest, and hereafter it will be excessively preposterous in the
‘Hum-Drum,’ the ‘Rowdy-Dow,’ or the ‘Goosetherumfoodle,’ to make
any farther spasmodic attempts at competition. These journals may
excel the ‘Lollipop’ in outcry, but, in all other points, give us
the ‘Lollipop!’ How this celebrated Magazine can sustain its
evidently tremendous expenses, is past comprehension. To be sure
it has a circulation of precisely half a million, and its
subscription-list has increased seventy-five per cent, within the
last couple of days; but then the sums it disburses, monthly, for
contributions, are scarcely credible; we are cognizant of the
fact, that Mademoiselle Cribalittle received no less than
eighty-seven cents and a half for her late valuable Revolutionary
Tale, entitled ‘The York-Town Katy-Did, and the Bunker-Hill
Katy-Didn’t.’
“The most able papers in the present number, are, of course,
those furnished by the editor, (the eminent Mr. Crab,) but there
are numerous magnificent contributions from such names as Snob,
Mademoiselle Cribalittle, Slyass, Mrs. Fibalittle, Mumblethumb,
Mrs. Squibalittle, and last, though not least, Fatquack. The
world may well be challenged to produce so rich a galaxy of
genius.
“The poem over the signature ‘Snob’ is, we find, attracting
universal commendation, and, we are constrained to say, deserves,
if possible, even more applause than it has received. The
‘Oil-of-Bob’ is the title of this masterpiece of eloquence and
art. One or two of our readers _may_ have a _very_ faint,
although sufficiently disgusting recollection of a poem (?)
similarly entitled, the perpetration of a miserable
penny-a-liner, mendicant, and cut-throat, connected in the
capacity of scullion, we believe, with one of the indecent prints
about the purlieus of the city; we beg them, for God’s sake, not
to confound the compositions. The author of the ‘Oil-of-Bob’ is,
we hear, Thingum Bob, Esq., a gentleman of high genius, and a
scholar. ‘Snob’ is merely a _nom-de-guerre. Sept_. 15—1 _t.”_
I could scarcely restrain my indignation while I perused the
concluding portions of this diatribe. It was clear to me that the
yea-nay manner—not to say the gentleness—the positive forbearance
with which the “Daddy-Long-Legs” spoke of that pig, the editor of
the “Gad-Fly”—it was evident to me, I say, that this gentleness
of speech could proceed from nothing else than a partiality for
the Fly—whom it was clearly the intention of the
“Daddy-Long-Legs” to elevate into reputation at my expense. Any
one, indeed, might perceive, with half an eye, that, had the real
design of the “Daddy” been what it wished to appear, it, (the
“Daddy”) might have expressed itself in terms more direct, more
pungent, and altogether more to the purpose. The words
“penny-a-liner,” “mendicant,” “scullion,” and “cut-throat,” were
epithets so intentionally inexpressive and equivocal, as to be
worse than nothing when applied to the author of the very worst
stanzas ever penned by one of the human race. We all know what is
meant by “damning with faint praise,” and, on the other hand, who
could fail seeing through the covert purpose of the “Daddy”—that
of glorifying with feeble abuse?
What the “Daddy” chose to say of the Fly, however, was no
business of mine. What it said of myself _was_. After the noble
manner in which the “Owl,” the “Toad,” the “Mole,” had expressed
themselves in respect to my ability, it was rather too much to be
coolly spoken of by a thing like the “Daddy-Long-Legs,” as merely
“a gentleman of high genius and a scholar.” Gentleman indeed! I
made up my mind at once, either to get a written apology from the
“Daddy-Long-Legs,” or to call it out.
Full of this purpose, I looked about me to find a friend whom I
could entrust with a message to his Daddyship, and as the editor
of the “Lollipop” had given me marked tokens of regard, I at
length concluded to seek assistance upon the present occasion.
I have never yet been able to account, in a manner satisfactory
to my own understanding, for the _very_ peculiar countenance and
demeanor with which Mr. Crab listened to me, as I unfolded to him
my design. He again went through the scene of the bell-rope and
cudgel, and did not omit the duck. At one period I thought he
really intended to quack. His fit, nevertheless, finally subsided
as before, and he began to act and speak in a rational way. He
declined bearing the cartel, however, and in fact, dissuaded me
from sending it at all; but was candid enough to admit that the
“Daddy-Long-Legs” had been disgracefully in the wrong—more
especially in what related to the epithets “gentleman and
scholar.”
Towards the end of this interview with Mr. Crab, who really
appeared to take a paternal interest in my welfare, he suggested
to me that I might turn an honest penny, and, at the same time,
advance my reputation, by occasionally playing Thomas Hawk for
the “Lollipop.”
I begged Mr. Crab to inform me who was Mr. Thomas Hawk, and how
it was expected that I should play him.
Here Mr. Crab again “made great eyes,” (as we say in Germany,)
but at length, recovering himself from a profound attack of
astonishment, he assured me that he employed the words “Thomas
Hawk” to avoid the colloquialism, Tommy, which was low—but that
the true idea was Tommy Hawk—or tomahawk—and that by “playing
tomahawk” he referred to scalping, brow-beating and otherwise
using-up the herd of poor-devil authors.
I assured my patron that, if this was all, I was perfectly
resigned to the task of playing Thomas Hawk. Hereupon Mr. Crab
desired me to use-up the editor of the “Gad-Fly” forthwith, in
the fiercest style within the scope of my ability, and as a
specimen of my powers. This I did, upon the spot, in a review of
the original “Oil-of-Bob,” occupying thirty-six pages of the
“Lollipop.” I found playing Thomas Hawk, indeed, a far less
onerous occupation than poetizing; for I went upon _system_
altogether, and thus it was easy to do the thing thoroughly and
well. My practice was this. I bought auction copies (cheap) of
“Lord Brougham’s Speeches,” “Cobbett’s Complete Works,” the “New
Slang-Syllabus,” the “Whole Art of Snubbing,” “Prentice’s
Billingsgate” (folio edition,) and “Lewis G. Clarke on Tongue.”
These works I cut up thoroughly with a currycomb, and then,
throwing the shreds into a sieve, sifted out carefully all that
might be thought decent, (a mere trifle); reserving the hard
phrases, which I threw into a large tin pepper-castor with
longitudinal holes, so that an entire sentence could get through
without material injury. The mixture was then ready for use. When
called upon to play Thomas Hawk, I anointed a sheet of fools-cap
with the white of a gander’s egg; then, shredding the thing to be
reviewed as I had previously shredded the books,—only with more
care, so as to get every word separate—I threw the latter shreds
in with the former, screwed on the lid of the castor, gave it a
shake, and so dusted out the mixture upon the egged foolscap;
where it stuck. The effect was beautiful to behold. It was
captivating. Indeed, the reviews I brought to pass by this simple
expedient have never been approached, and were the wonder of the
world. At first, through bashfulness—the result of inexperience—I
was a little put out by a certain inconsistency—a certain air of
the _bizarre_, (as we say in France,) worn by the composition as
a whole. All the phrases did not _fit_, (as we say in the
Anglo-Saxon). Many were quite awry. Some, even, were
up-side-down; and there were none of them which were not, in some
measure, injured in regard to effect, by this latter species of
accident, when it occurred—with the exception of Mr. Lewis
Clarke’s paragraphs, which were so vigorous, and altogether
stout, that they seemed not particularly disconcerted by any
extreme of position, but looked equally happy and satisfactory,
whether on their heads, or on their heels.
What became of the editor of the “Gad-Fly,” after the publication
of my criticism on his “Oil-of-Bob,” it is somewhat difficult to
determine. The most reasonable conclusion is, that he wept
himself to death. At all events he disappeared instantaneously
from the face of the earth, and no man has seen even the ghost of
him since.
This matter having been properly accomplished, and the Furies
appeased, I grew at once into high favor with Mr. Crab. He took
me into his confidence, gave me a permanent situation as Thomas
Hawk of the “Lollipop,” and, as for the present, he could afford
me no salary, allowed me to profit, at discretion, by his advice.
“My dear Thingum,” said he to me one day after dinner, “I respect
your abilities and love you as a son. You shall be my heir. When
I die I will bequeath you the ‘Lollipop.’ In the meantime I will
make a man of you—I _will_—provided always that you follow my
counsel. The first thing to do is to get rid of the old bore.”
“Boar?” said I inquiringly—“pig, eh?—_aper?_ (as we say in
Latin)—who?—where?”
“Your father,” said he.
“Precisely,” I replied,—“pig.”
“You have your fortune to make, Thingum,” resumed Mr. Crab, “and
that governor of yours is a millstone about your neck. We must
cut him at once.” [Here I took out my knife.] “We must cut him,”
continued Mr. Crab, “decidedly and forever. He won’t do—he
_won’t_. Upon second thoughts, you had better kick him, or cane
him, or something of that kind.”
“What do you say,” I suggested modestly, “to my kicking him in
the first instance, caning him afterwards, and winding up by
tweaking his nose?”
Mr. Crab looked at me musingly for some moments, and then
answered:
“I think, Mr. Bob, that what you propose would answer
sufficiently well—indeed remarkably well—that is to say, as far
as it went—but barbers are exceedingly hard to cut, and I think,
upon the whole, that, having performed upon Thomas Bob the
operations you suggest, it would be advisable to blacken, with
your fists, both his eyes, very carefully and thoroughly, to
prevent his ever seeing you again in fashionable promenades.
After doing this, I really do not perceive that you can do any
more. However—it might be just as well to roll him once or twice
in the gutter, and then put him in charge of the police. Any time
the next morning you can call at the watch-house and swear an
assault.”
I was much affected by the kindness of feeling towards me
personally, which was evinced in this excellent advice of Mr.
Crab, and I did not fail to profit by it forthwith. The result
was, that I got rid of the old bore, and began to feel a little
independent and gentleman-like. The want of money, however, was,
for a few weeks, a source of some discomfort; but at length, by
carefully putting to use my two eyes, and observing how matters
went just in front of my nose, I perceived how the thing was to
be brought about. I say “thing”—be it observed—for they tell me
the Latin for it is _rem_. By the way, talking of Latin, can any
one tell me the meaning of _quocunque_—or what is the meaning of
_modo?_
My plan was exceedingly simple. I bought, for a song, a sixteenth
of the “Snapping-Turtle”:—that was all. The thing was _done_, and
I put money in my purse. There were some trivial arrangements
afterwards, to be sure; but these formed no portion of the plan.
They were a consequence—a result. For example, I bought pen, ink,
and paper, and put them into furious activity. Having thus
completed a Magazine article, I gave it, for appellation,
“Fol-Lol, _by the Author of_ ‘The Oil-of-Bob,’” and enveloped it
to the “Goosetherumfoodle.” That journal, however, having
pronounced it “twattle” in the “Monthly Notices to
Correspondents,” I reheaded the paper “‘Hey-Diddle-Diddle,’ by
Thingum Bob, Esq., Author of the Ode on ‘The Oil-of-Bob,’ _and_
Editor of the ‘Snapping-Turtle.’” With this amendment, I
re-enclosed it to the “Goosetherumfoodle,” and, while I awaited a
reply, published daily, in the “Turtle,” six columns of what may
be termed philosophical and analytical investigation of the
literary merits of the “Goosetherumfoodle,” as well as of the
personal character of the editor of the “Goosetherumfoodle.” At
the end of a week the “Goosetherumfoodle” discovered that it had,
by some odd mistake, “confounded a stupid article, headed
‘Hey-Diddle-Diddle’ and composed by some unknown ignoramus, with
a gem of resplendent lustre similarly entitled, the work of
Thingum Bob, Esq., the celebrated author of ‘The Oil-of-Bob.’”
The “Goosetherumfoodle” deeply “regretted this very natural
accident,” and promised, moreover, an insertion of the _genuine_
“Hey-Diddle-Diddle” in the very next number of the Magazine.
The fact is, I _thought_—I _really_ thought—I thought at the
time—I thought _then_—and have no reason for thinking otherwise
_now_—that the “Goosetherumfoodle” _did_ make a mistake. With the
best intentions in the world, I never knew any thing that made as
many singular mistakes as the “Goosetherumfoodle.” From that day
I took a liking to the “Goosetherumfoodle,” and the result was I
soon saw into the very depths of its literary merits, and did not
fail to expatiate upon them, in the “Turtle,” whenever a fitting
opportunity occurred. And it is to be regarded as a very peculiar
coincidence—as one of those positively _remarkable_ coincidences
which set a man to serious thinking—that just such a total
revolution of opinion—just such entire _bouleversement_, (as we
say in French,)—just such thorough _topsiturviness_, (if I may be
permitted to employ a rather forcible term of the Choctaws,) as
happened, _pro_ and _con_, between myself on the one part, and
the “Goosetherumfoodle” on the other, did actually again happen,
in a brief period afterwards, and with precisely similar
circumstances, in the case of myself and the “Rowdy-Dow,” and in
the case of myself and the “Hum-Drum.”
Thus it was that, by a master-stroke of genius, I at length
consummated my triumphs by “putting money in my purse,” and thus
may be said really and fairly to have commenced that brilliant
and eventful career which rendered me illustrious, and which now
enables me to say, with Chateaubriand, “I have made
history”—“_J’ai fait l’histoire_.”
I have indeed “made history.” From the bright epoch which I now
record, my actions—my works—are the property of mankind. They are
familiar to the world. It is, then, needless for me to detail
how, soaring rapidly, I fell heir to the “Lollipop”—how I merged
this journal in the “Hum-Drum”—how again I made purchase of the
“Rowdy-Dow,” thus combining the three periodicals—how, lastly, I
effected a bargain for the sole remaining rival, and united all
the literature of the country in one magnificent Magazine, known
everywhere as the
“Rowdy-Dow, Lollipop, Hum-Drum,
and
goosetherumfoodle.”
Yes; I have made history. My fame is universal. It extends to the
uttermost ends of the earth. You cannot take up a common
newspaper in which you shall not see some allusion to the
immortal Thingum Bob. It is Mr. Thingum Bob said so, and Mr.
Thingum Bob wrote this, and Mr. Thingum Bob did that. But I am
meek and expire with an humble heart. After all, what is it?—this
indescribable something which men will persist in terming
“genius?” I agree with Buffon—with Hogarth—it is but _diligence_
after all.
Look at _me!_—how I labored—how I toiled—how I wrote! Ye Gods,
did I _not_ write? I knew not the word “ease.” By day I adhered
to my desk, and at night, a pale student, I consumed the midnight
oil. You should have seen me—you _should_. I leaned to the right.
I leaned to the left. I sat forward. I sat backward. I sat upon
end. I sat _tete baissée_, (as they have it in the Kickapoo,)
bowing my head close to the alabaster page. And, through all,
I—_wrote_. Through joy and through sorrow, I—_wrote_. Through
hunger and through thirst, I—_wrote_. Through good report and
through ill report, I—_wrote_. Through sunshine and through
moonshine, I—_wrote. What_ I wrote it is unnecessary to say. The
_style!_—that was the thing. I caught it from
Fatquack—whizz!—fizz!—— and I am giving you a specimen of it now.