Mr. Howells is, perhaps, not always so well appreciated in his own

country as he deserves--and this in spite of the facts that his novels

are widely read and his name is in all the magazines. What I mean is,

that in the conversation of the cultured circles of Boston or New York

too much stress is apt to be laid on the prosaic and commonplace

character of his materials. There are, perhaps, unusually good reasons

for this point of view. Cromwell's wife and daughters would probably

prefer to have him painted wartless, but posterity wants him warts and

all. So those to whom the average--the _very_ average--American is an

every-day and all-day occurrence cannot abide him in their literature;

while we who are removed by the ocean of space can enjoy these

pictures of common life, as enabling us, better than any idealistic

romance or study of the rare and extraordinary, to realise the life of

our American cousins. To those who can read between the lines with any

discretion, I should say that novels like "Silas Lapham" and "A Modern

Instance" will give a clearer idea of American character and

tendencies than any other contemporary works of fiction; to those who

can read between the lines--for it is obvious that the commonplace and

the slightly vulgar no more exhaust the field of society in the United

States than elsewhere. But to me Mr. Howells, even when in his most

realistic and sordid vein, always _suggests_ the ideal and the noble;

the reverse of the medal proclaims loudly that it _is_ the reverse,

and that there is an obverse of a very different kind to be seen by

those who will turn the coin. It seems to me that no very great

palæontological skill is necessary to reconstruct the whole frame of

the animal from the portion that Mr. Howells sets up for us. His

novels remind me of those maps of a limited area which indicate very

clearly what lies beyond, by arrows on their margins. In nothing does

Mr. Howells more clearly show his "Americanism" than in his almost

divinely sympathetic and tolerant attitude towards commonplace,

erring, vulgar humanity. "Ah, poor real life, which I love!" he writes

somewhere; "can I make others share the delight I find in thy foolish

and insipid face!" We must remember in reading him his own theory of

the duty of the novelist. "I am extremely opposed to what we call

ideal characters. I think their portrayal is mischievous; it is

altogether offensive to me as an artist, and, as far as the morality

goes, I believe that when an artist tries to create an ideal he mixes

some truth up with a vast deal of sentimentality, and produces

something that is extremely noxious as well as nauseous. I think that

no man can consistently portray a probable type of human character

without being useful to his readers. When he endeavors to create

something higher than that, he plays the fool himself and tempts his

readers to folly. He tempts young men and women to try to form

themselves upon models that would be detestable in life, if they were

ever found there."

Perhaps the delicacy of Mr. Howells' touch and the gentle subtlety of

his satire are nowhere better illustrated than in the little

drawing-room "farces" of which he frequently publishes one in an

American magazine about Christmas time. I call them farces because he

himself applies that name to them; but these dainty little comediettas

contain none of the rollicking qualities which the word usually

connotes to English ears. They have all the _finesse_ of the best

French work of the kind, combined with a purity of atmosphere and of

intent that we are apt to claim as Anglo-Saxon, and which, perhaps, is

especially characteristic of America. One is tired of hearing, in this

connection, of the blush that rises to the innocent girl's cheek; but

why should even those who are supposed to be past the age of blushing

not also enjoy humour unspiced by even a suggestion of lubricity? The

"Mikado" and "Pinafore" have done yeoman's service in displacing the

meretricious delights of Offenbach and Lecocq; and Howells' little

pieces yield an exquisite, though innocent, enjoyment to those whose

taste in farces has not been fashioned and spoiled by clumsy English

adaptations or imitations of intriguing _levers-de-rideau_, and to

those who do not associate the name of farce with horse-play and

practical joking. They form the best illustration of what has been

described as Mr. Howells' "method of occasionally opening up to the

reader through the bewilderingly intricate mazes of his dialogue clear

perceptions of the true values of his characters, imitating thus the

actual trick of life, which can safely be depended on to now and then

expose meanings that words have cleverly served the purpose of

concealing." If I hesitate to call them comediettas "in porcelain," it

is because the suggested analogy falls short, owing to the greater

reconditeness, the purer intellectual quality, of Mr. Howells' humour

as compared with Mr. Austin Dobson's. So intensely American in quality

are these scenes from the lives of Mr. and Mrs. Willis Campbell, Mr.

and Mrs. Roberts, and their friends, that it sometimes seems to me

that they might almost be used as touchstones for the advisability of

a visit to the United States. If you can appreciate and enjoy these

farces, go to America by all means; you will have a "good time." If

you cannot, better stay at home, unless your motive is merely one of

base mechanic necessity; you will find the American atmosphere a

little too rare.

A recent phase of Mr. Howells' activity--that, namely, in which, like

Mr. William Morris, he has boldly risked his reputation as a literary

artist in order to espouse unpopular social causes of whose justice he

is convinced--will interest all who have hearts to feel as well as

brains to think. He made his fame by consummately artistic work,

addressed to the daintiest of literacy palates; and yet in such books

as "A Hazard of New Fortunes" and "A Traveller from Altruria" he has

conscientiously taken up the defence and propagation of a form of

socialism, without blanching before the epicure who demands his

literature "neat" or the Philistine householder who brands all

socialistic writings as dangerous. Mr. Howells, however, knows his

public; and the reforming element in him cannot but rejoice at the

hearing he has won through its artistic counterpart. No one of his

literary brethren of any importance has, so far as I know, emulated

his courage in this particular. Some, like Mr. Bellamy, have made a

reputation by their socialistic writings; none has risked so

magnificent a structure already built up on a purely artistic

foundation. It is mainly on account of this phase of his work, in

which he has not forsaken his art, but makes it "the expression of his

whole life and the thought and feeling mature life has brought to

him," that Mr. Howells has been claimed as _the_ American novelist,

the best delineator of American life.[22]

Mr. Howells the poet is not nearly so well known as Mr. Howells the

novelist; and there are doubtless many European students of American

literature who are unaware of the extremely characteristic work he has

done in verse. The accomplished critic, Mr. R.H. Stoddard, writes thus

of a volume of poems published by Mr. Howells about three years

ago:[23] "There is something here which, if not new in American

poetry, has never before made itself so manifest there, never before

declared itself with such vivacity and force, the process by which it

emerged from emotion and clothed itself in speech being so

undiscoverable by critical analysis that it seems, as Matthew Arnold

said of some of Wordsworth's poetry, as if Nature took the pen from

his hand and wrote in his stead." These poems are all short, and their

titles (such as "What Shall It Profit?" "The Sphinx," "If,"

"To-morrow," "Good Society," "Equality," "Heredity," and so forth)

sufficiently indicate that they do not rank among the lighter

triflings with the muse. Their abiding sense of an awful and

inevitable fate, their keen realisation of the startling contrasts

between wealth and poverty, their symbolical grasp on the great

realities of life and death, and the consummate skill of the artistic

setting are all pervaded with something that recalls the paintings of

Mr. G.F. Watts or the visions of Miss Olive Schreiner. One specimen

can alone be given here:

"The Bewildered Guest

"I was not asked if I should like to come.

I have not seen my host here since I came,

Or had a word of welcome in his name.

Some say that we shall never see him, and some

That we shall see him elsewhere, and then know

Why we were bid. How long I am to stay

I have not the least notion. None, they say,

Was ever told when he should come or go.

But every now and then there bursts upon

The song and mirth a lamentable noise,

A sound of shrieks and sobs, that strikes our joys

Dumb in our breasts; and then, someone is gone.

They say we meet him. None knows where or when.

We know we shall not meet him here again."

Mr. Howells has, naturally enough, the defects of his qualities; and

if it were my purpose here to present an exhaustive study of his

writings, rather than merely to touch lightly upon his "American"

characteristics, it would be desirable to consider some of these in

this place. In his desire to avoid the merely pompous he sometimes

falls into the really trifling. His love of analysis runs away with

him at times; and parts of such books as "A World of Chance" must

weary all but his most undiscriminating admirers. His self-restraint

sometimes disappoints us of a vivid colour or a passionate throb which

we feel to be our due. His humour and his satire occasionally pass

from the fine to the thin.

It is, however, with Mr. Howells in his capacity of literary critic

alone that my disappointment is too great to allow of silence. For the

exquisiteness of a writer like Mr. Henry James he has the keenest

insight, the warmest appreciation. His thorough-going conviction in

the prime necessity of realism even leads him out of his way to

commend Gabriele d'Annunzio, in whom some of us can detect little but

a more than Zolaesque coarseness with a total lack of Zola's genius,

insight, purpose, or philosophy. But when he comes to speak of a

Thackeray or a Scott, his attitude is one that, to put it in the most

complimentary form that I can think of, reminds us strongly of Homeric

drowsiness. The virtue of James is one thing and the virtue of Scott

is another; but surely admiration for both does not make too

unreasonable a demand on catholicity of palate? Mr. Howells could

never write himself down an ass, but surely in his criticism of the

"Wizard of the North" he has written himself down as one whose

literary creed is narrower than his human heart. The school of which

Mr. Henry James is a most accomplished member has added more than one

exquisite new flavour to the banquet of letters; but it may well be

questioned whether a taste for these may not be acquired at too dear a

cost if it necessitates a loss of relish for the steady good sense,

the power of historic realisation, the rich humanity, and the

marvellously fertile imagination of Walter Scott. It is not, I hope, a

merely national prejudice that makes me oppose Mr. Howells in this

point, though, perhaps, there is a touch of remonstrance in the

reflection that that great novelist seems to have no use for the

Briton in his works except as a foil or a butt for his American

characters.

In considering Mr. Howells as an exponent of Americanism in

literature, we have left him in an attitude almost of _Americanus

contra mundum_--at any rate in the posture of one who is so entirely

absorbed by his delight in the contemporary and national existence

around him as to be partially blind to claims separated from him by

tracts of time and space. My next example of the American in

literature is, I think, to the full as national a type as Mr. Howells,

though her Americanism is shown rather in subjective character than in

objective theme. Miss Emily Dickinson is still a name so unfamiliar to

English readers that I may be pardoned a few lines of biographical

explanation. She was born in 1830, the daughter of the leading lawyer

of Amherst, a small and quiet town of New England, delightfully

situated on a hill, looking out over the undulating woods of the

Connecticut valley. It is a little larger than the English

Marlborough, and like it owes its distinctive tone to the presence of

an important educational institute, Amherst College being one of the

best-known and worthiest of the smaller American colleges. In this

quiet little spot Miss Dickinson spent the whole of her life, and even

to its limited society she was almost as invisible as a cloistered nun

except for her appearances at an annual reception given by her father

to the dignitaries of the town and college. There was no definite

reason either in her physical or mental health for this life of

extraordinary seclusion; it seems to have been simply the natural

outcome of a singularly introspective temperament. She rarely showed

or spoke of her poems to any but one or two intimate friends; only

three or four were published during her lifetime; and it was with

considerable surprise that her relatives found, on her death in 1886,

a large mass of poetical remains, finished and unfinished. A

considerable selection from them has been published in three little

volumes, edited with tender appreciation by two of her friends, Mrs.

Mabel Loomis Todd and Col. T.W. Higginson.

Her poems are all in lyrical form--if the word form may be applied to

her utter disregard of all metrical conventions. Her lines are rugged

and her expressions wayward to an extraordinary degree, but "her

verses all show a strange cadence of inner rhythmical music," and the

"thought-rhymes" which she often substitutes for the more regular

assonances appeal "to an unrecognised sense more elusive than hearing"

(Mrs. Todd). In this curious divergence from established rules of

verse Miss Dickinson may be likened to Walt Whitman, whom she differs

from in every other particular, and notably in her pithiness as

opposed to his diffuseness; but with her we feel in the strongest way

that her mode is natural and unsought, utterly free from affectation,

posing, or self-consciousness.

Colonel Higginson rightly finds her nearest analogue in William Blake;

but this "nearest" is far from identity. While tenderly feminine in

her sympathy for suffering, her love of nature, her loyalty to her

friends, she is in expression the most unfeminine of poets. The usual

feminine impulsiveness and full expression of emotion is replaced in

her by an extraordinary condensation of phrase and feeling. In her

letters we find the eternal womanly in her yearning love for her

friends, her brooding anxiety and sympathy for the few lives closely

intertwined with her own. In her poems, however, one is rather

impressed with the deep well of poetic insight and feeling from which

she draws, but never unreservedly. In spite of frequent strange

exaggeration of phrase one is always conscious of a fund of reserve

force. The subjects of her poems are few, but the piercing delicacy

and depth of vision with which she turned from death and eternity to

nature and to love make us feel the presence of that rare thing,

genius. Hers is a wonderful instance of the way in which genius can

dispense with experience; she sees more by pure intuition than others

distil from the serried facts of an eventful life. Perhaps, in one of

her own phrases, she is "too intrinsic for renown," but she has

appealed strongly to a surprisingly large band of readers in the

United States, and it seems to me will always hold her audience. Those

who admit Miss Dickinson's talent, but deny it to be poetry, may be

referred to Thoreau's saying that no definition of poetry can be given

which the true poet will not somewhere sometime brush aside. It is a

new departure, and the writer in the _Nation_ (Oct. 10, 1895) is

probably right when he says: "So marked a new departure rarely leads

to further growth. Neither Whitman nor Miss Dickinson ever stepped

beyond the circle they first drew."

It is difficult to select quite adequate samples of Miss Dickinson's

art, but perhaps the following little poems will give some idea of her

naked simplicity, terseness, oddness,--of her method, in short, if we

can apply that word to anything so spontaneous and unconscious:

"I'm nobody! Who are you?

Are you nobody, too?

Then there's a pair of us. Don't tell!

They'd banish us, you know.

"How dreary to be somebody!

How public, like a frog,

To tell your name the livelong day

To an admiring bog!"

* * * * *

"I taste a liquor never brewed,

From tankards scooped in pearl;

Not all the vats upon the Rhine

Yield such an alcohol!

"Inebriate of air am I,

And debauchee of dew,

Reeling, through endless summer days,

From inns of molten blue.

"When landlords turn the drunken bee

Out of the foxglove's door,

When butterflies renounce their drams,

I shall but drink the more!

"Till seraphs swing their snowy hats,

And saints to windows run,

To see the little tippler

Leaning against the sun!"

* * * * *

"But how he set I know not.

There seemed a purple stile

Which little yellow boys and girls

Were climbing all the while,

"Till when they reached the other side,

A dominie in grey

Put gently up the evening bars,

And led the flock away."

* * * * *

"He preached upon 'breadth' till it argued him narrow--

The broad are too broad to define;

And of 'truth' until it proclaimed him a liar--

The truth never flaunted a sign.

Simplicity fled from his counterfeit presence

As gold the pyrites would shun.

What confusion would cover the innocent Jesus

To meet so enabled a man!"

The "so _enabled_ a man" is a very characteristic Dickinsonian phrase.

So, too, are these:

"He put the belt around my life--

I heard the buckle snap."

"Unfitted by an instant's grace

For the contented beggar's face

I wore an hour ago."

* * * * *

"Just his sigh, accented,

Had been legible to me."

* * * * *

"The bustle in a house

The morning after death

Is solemnest of industries

Enacted upon earth--

The sweeping up the heart,

And putting love away

We shall not want to use again

Until eternity."

Her interest in all the familiar sights and sounds of a village garden

is evident through all her verses. Her illustrations are not

recondite, literary, or conventional; she finds them at her own door.

The robin, the buttercup, the maple, furnish what she needs. The bee,

in particular, seems to have had a peculiar fascination for her, and

hums through all her poems. She had even a kindly word for that

"neglected son of genius," the spider. Her love of children is equally

evident, and no one has ever better caught the spirit of

"Saturday Afternoon

"From all the jails the boys and girls

Ecstatically leap,

Beloved, only afternoon

That prison doesn't keep.

"They storm the earth and stun the air,

A mob of solid bliss.

Alas! that frowns could lie in wait

For such a foe as this!"

The bold extravagance of her diction (which is not, however, _mere_

extravagance) and her ultra-American familiarity with the forces of

nature may be illustrated by such stanzas as:

"What if the poles should frisk about

And stand upon their heads!

I hope I'm ready for the worst,

Whatever prank betides."

* * * * *

"If I could see you in a year,

I'd wind the months in balls,

And put them each in separate drawers

Until their time befalls.

"If certain, when this life was out,

That yours and mine should be,

I'd toss it yonder like a rind,

And taste eternity."

For her the lightnings "skip like mice," the thunder "crumbles like a

stuff." What a critic has called her "Emersonian self-possession"

towards God may be seen in the little poem on the last page of her

first volume, where she addresses the Deity as "burglar, banker,

father." There is, however, no flippancy in this, no conscious

irreverence; Miss Dickinson is not "orthodox," but she is genuinely

spiritual and religious. Inspired by its truly American and "_actuel_"

freedom, her muse does not fear to sing of such modern and mechanical

phenomena as the railway train, which she loves to see "lap the miles

and lick the valleys up," while she is fascinated by the contrast

between its prodigious force and the way in which it stops, "docile

and omnipotent, at its own stable door." But even she can hardly bring

the smoking locomotive into such pathetic relations with nature as the

"little brig," whose "white foot tripped, then dropped from sight,"

leaving "the ocean's heart too smooth, too blue, to break for you."

Her poems on death and the beyond, on time and eternity, are full of

her peculiar note. Death is the "one dignity" that "delays for all;"

the meanest brow is so ennobled by the majesty of death that "almost a

powdered footman might dare to touch it now," and yet no beggar would

accept "the _éclat_ of death, had he the power to spurn." "The quiet

nonchalance of death" is a resting-place which has no terrors for her;

death "abashed" her no more than "the porter of her father's lodge."

Death's chariot also holds Immortality. The setting sail for "deep

eternity" brings a "divine intoxication" such as the "inland soul"

feels on its "first league out from land." Though she "never spoke

with God, nor visited in heaven," she is "as certain of the spot as if

the chart were given." "In heaven somehow, it will be even, some new

equation given." "Christ will explain each separate anguish in the

fair schoolroom of the sky."

"A death-blow is a life-blow to some

Who, till they died, did not alive become;

Who, had they lived, had died, but when

They died, vitality begun."

The reader who has had the patience to accompany me through these

pages devoted to Miss Dickinson will surely own, whether in scoff or

praise, the essentially American nature of her muse. Her defects are

easily paralleled in the annals of English literature; but only in the

liberal atmosphere of the New World, comparatively unshadowed by

trammels of authority and standards of taste, could they have

co-existed with so much of the highest quality.

A prominent phenomenon in the development of American literature--so

prominent as to call for comment even in a fragmentary and haphazard

sketch like the present--is the influence exercised by the monthly

magazine. The editors of the leading literary periodicals have been

practically able to wield a censorship to which there is no parallel

in England. The magazine has been the recognised gateway to the

literary public; the sweep of the editorial net has been so wide that

it has gathered in nearly all the best literary work of the past few

decades, at any rate in the department of _belles lettres_. It is not

easy to name many important works of pure literature, as distinct from

the scientific, the philosophical, and the instructive, that have not

made their bow to the public through the pages of the _Century_, the

_Atlantic Monthly_, or some one or other of their leading competitors.

And probably the proportion of works by new authors that have appeared

in the same way is still greater. There are, possibly, two sides as to

the value of this supremacy of the magazine, though to most observers

the advantages seem to outweigh the disadvantages. Among the former

may be reckoned the general encouragement of reading, the

opportunities afforded to young writers, the raising of the rate of

authors' pay, the dissemination of a vast quantity of useful and

salutary information in a popular form. Perhaps of more importance

than any of these has been the maintenance of that purity of moral

tone in which modern American literature is superior to all its

contemporaries. Malcontents may rail at "grandmotherly legislation in

letters," at the undue deference paid to the maiden's blush, at the

encouragement of the mealy-mouthed and hypocritical; but it is a

ground of very solid satisfaction, be the cause what it may, that

recent American literature has been so free from the emasculate

_fin-de-siècle-ism_, the nauseating pseudo-realism, the epigrammatic

hysteria, that has of late been so rife in certain British circles.

Moreover, it is impossible to believe that any really strong talent

could have been stifled by the frown of the magazine editor. Walt

Whitman made his mark without that potentate's assistance; and if

America had produced a Zola, he would certainly have come to the

front, even if his genius had been hampered with a burden of more than

Zolaesque filth.

The Land of Contrasts: A Briton's View of His American Kin · 第 12 / 19 段