THE ESSAY'S STRUGGLE FOR LIFE.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1277, 4 November 1911, Page 9

THE ESSAY'S STRUGGLE FOR LIFE.

Tho demand for timeliness in literature Jus aimost aoao to utvun luriker practico Oi tas oiuotyio assay, bnon wen uses, it is true, euanucw to aounsn. Mtn in ptenty contrive to gee pumished their particular vmks on ail manner oi topics. Iwvt-r orfoxc, wo sap pew, nas suon a variety ol writing iouutl its way into piint. Spheres oi activity whicn uuvit recently were thought incanablo of litertry expression now «n'.er tea best-looking buvis and tako th.su 1 piaces bessuc—sometimes supptant—iliiwrtou and Montaigne. There have appeared recently volumes of essays" on Uusicevs Management, on Beauty Culture, or "Inside" Baseb.-li; and evtry nook and cranny of the earth is steadily pressing its claims upon the eearcher lor "copy." Tho result is-ex-clusivo now of fiction—a htoraturo of tremendous panoramic rango which superficially at least is promoting a considerable lllti'r-acquamtaney arnoug earth-dwellers. The present-day essay, or article, gets its occasion for being frcari contemporary happenings, and attaches i!s kkas to "facts"; the author of the old-style essay moro often plucked his occasion fiam a clear sky and hitched his ideas to a star.

ins contrast is Riven point by tho aw.haic look of sporadic efforts to continue using the older form. A book has just appeared containing three such old standbys as "Courtesy," "Friendship," and "Sslf-dcception." To begin and article nowadays, even though it is intended for the "general" reader, with "Courtesy" is a beautiful and rare thing," rather ahocks one by its utter disregard of any timely "lead." For better or for worse, the General reader, however widely he may browse, little for a truly general treatment of a subjec'.. Let 2. man write on the perennial topic, statecraft, and unit** he is directing hii words tc scholars, he wonld usually thinlc futilo any analogic.'; from Plato or Aristotle, or even from aclua.l political conditions of a few centuries ago The general reader does not wholly object to them, but they arc reckoned a.s mere ornaments of the author's mind, nr.d, of course., arc not supposed to carry conviction with them. Tt. may be that mortals were intended lo see' wholly with (heir eyes rather than with their intelligences. If so, how nobly are we moderns fulfilling our destiny! Photographic appearances, thcy'ro the thing; '.t'atpsmnnship to ns means a definite situation with 11 man in tho midst of it. We love tho concrete fact precipitated from Ks abstraction. The framework of tho old-time essay war, philosophy, and facts and situations were to it as the fruit to the trap; without it tlicv had no meaning nor chance of existence. One has but to think of the opening sentences of Bacon's or Ilazlitts er Emerson's better-known essays to recall the lnr;;e plan, or range, which each author held up before himself. Individu-

ais aro dcseribc<l in tonus of human nature, not ol their own day meiely, but of every day, and so i: was easy to compare Alexander and Napc-icon, to liud a warning trom an umbilicus imperialism in the downiatl ol Homo, or an argument for simplicity uj living in the rctordwl o>:--coiitent of ages of wealth and gaiety. lor the moment each subject is projected against thi large scheme of things, and rightly or wrongly is, given its pigeonhole in the universal Iraiuo. It is evident that to practise this style of essay acceptably one needed rare, ciualiiieations —not only breadth of vision and an orffimistd _ philosophy, but tho quickening, visualising phraso and example. U hether or not we approve of Bacon's talcing all knowledge for his province, th;\t was far from making him dryly abstruse. Without descending from his watch-tower of philosophy, ho contrives to surround tho reader with precise happy instances; there'is roominess, the luring of the gaze to the much beyond the immediate present, and yet tho reader is never gazing vacantly. Of living writers it is possible to recall but a scant lev,- who even' attempt such a combination. In this country Dr. Crothers is certainly the most eminent.

It .is not very difficult to understand such 'a falling-oil In the essay. The essay, like the sonnet, has art and artifice, and these nowadays aro not usually supposed to go hand m hand with tho "truth. 'J'o bo sui'p, truth itself has changed its hue of late, and largely because the ''general" reader has become "a specialist in truth," and therefore knows it when _ ho sees it. He is a specialist, that is, in surfaces, from here to Vanlc Kow; he can usually tell you when you get your "facts" and statistics mixed, lint this is not often to bo philosophical; and for that temperament tho old-timo essay was created. Indeed, it requires little proof to show that the run of intelligent people to-day have no philosophies of life; far-leading vistas are not summoned up by their talk, and thoir silence gives no impression that they could and they would furnish a large explanation. Even Mr. Chesterton, who continues to exorciso blind popular superstitions by his little lantern of logic, has not the older breadth. He caught the people's favour precisely because ho hadn't it, but because ho showed a rare ingenuity in manipulating their own sort of "facts." Liko tho expert in whist, he tells you ths.t certain long-accepted leads are unaccountably stupid, and with a stroke thrills you; but ho never questions your belief "that a ten-spot nnd a knave are truer facts than faith and hope. It must be said, however, that though the old-time essayhas lost its popularity, tho band or those who still find pleasure in it is largo enough not to discourage any writer of the proper measurements from still trying it.—New York "Nation.""