The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1912. THE ART OF BIOGRAPHY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1593, 9 November 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1912. THE ART OF BIOGRAPHY.

( . $— r- - .The- literary world has of late discussing the methods of biographers','"'with the result that many new .and ' interesting deliverances have been made on this particularly attractive theme. . Sir Sidney' Lee'sPrinciples of Biography first direct- 1 ed attention to the need that .existed, for; biographies being written with candour and free from all personal bias. His valuable monograph lays down certain broad principles, which he considers should guide the biographer in his Work, obvious though the fact must be that success must largely depend, first on, the subject, and afterwards 'Upon the settled opinion, the-literary acutnen, even the, personal idiosyricragieß of the biographer. Wlieh. S*R Sidney Lee proclaims the law that eandfiur is the first duty of those who essay this task of delineation;, few there are who will dispute his dictum] but when ho suggests what seem rules for the form, for the construction, of biography his advice rnust cease to be of much public utility. Were all biographies prepared on the same plan, with. no . pppor* tunity provided for. the "'-display of originality on the part of the writers, and every famous individual subjected to the same mode of treatment, the present attractiveness, the perennial freshness of these hitman documents wquM be greatly imperilled. The style'and the taste of'the author must remain free and untrammelled in biography, just as in other forms of literary activity. In the discussion to which wg have referred, the three biographies which are universally acknowledged to be the best, alike of the ancient) as of the modern, world, have been appraised anew and placed secure as before within their niches of fame. These' three great works are/ of course, Plutarch's Parallel Lives, Lockhart's Life of Sir .Walter Scott, and Boswell's Life of Samuel Jvhnson. Each of these being widely different in in tone and in style, from the remaining two, the discussion has turned largely uppn the relative merits qf Lookhart and Boswell. "The Life of Johnson," sayß Macatjlay, "is assuredly 'a great, a very great work. Homer • is not more decidedly the first of •■< heroic poets, Shakespeare is not' more decidedly the first of dramatists, PeMOSTHENES is not more decidedly the first of orators, than Boswell is the first of biographets," Macaulay's judgment has remained acceptable from the day it was first published., Boswell, however, constructed hiß monumental biography _ according to no fixed rules: rules laid down, that is, probably by a man standing no higher in the literary sphere than himself. MAcAutAY, while lavishing] praise on the Life of Johnson, has little save words of contempt for its author. Carlyle, though fully alive to Boswell's faults and failings, generously acknowledges his force, diligence, and vivacity, declaring that "a more free, perfect, snalit and spirit-speaking likeness" had not I been drawn for many centuries of I man by man. .Here the subject was all in all. When someone w«B lamenting to Dr. Jcwett the sad absence of Boswells in these later days, the Master replied that, not Boswells were lacking, but Johnsons. No suggestion has been forthcoming that Boswell should have performed his great task in a Manner different from that -.which he deliberately adopted and rigorously adhered to And that manner, when the eomplet work has been considered; is found to be surprising in its simplicity. The limelight is ever playing upon the great central figure, and that so brightly that little, surely, can csi cape the eye of the onlooker. Boswell fulfils to the letter the first requirement advanced by Sir Sidney Lee for the production of porfcefc biography. He admits that Boswell

ia the supreme champion of biographic frankness, "His native candour robs his tendency to idolatry of its familiar mischiefs. He declines to suppress anything that helps his reader to realise Johnson's personality." All readers who have been captured by Bos well's enthralling pages know Da* Johnson, Everything about him, as Macaulay obscrvcß, is ''as, familiar to us as the objects by which we have been surrounded from childhood." Among the more recont, outstanding examples of modofn biography may bo mentioned Loud Morley s Life, of Gladstone as providing a fairly liberal measuro ot Bosweiiisni. Some table-talk at Biarritz may be cited by way of example. Lord Moju.Br plays the part of Boswell to perfection, even to following Boswell in the early transferring of the conversation to paper, The result is a chapter of •imperishable literature. Lookhart in his Life of Scott frankly expresses disapproval of the methods by which Boswell achieved fame: a fame as lastjng, in all probability, as the English language. "I never thought it lawful," he writes, "to keep a journal of what passes in private society, so that iio one need expect from the sequel of this narrative any detailed record ,of Sgott'h familiar talk. ... I also wish to enter a protest once for all against the general' fidelity of several literary gentlemen who have kindly forwarded to me private lucubrations of theirs, designed to Boswelliso ScoTr, and which they itiay probably publish hereafter." Loceuabt here raised a somewhat difficult question of social ethics, displaying a fastidiousness which has, however, never' commanded much general sympathy. Oho thing is sum, and it is that'if a famous man is to be fully understood in all his relations of life, heed, and very carefuijieed, must bo given to his private life, _his conversation, and all that transpires within his social circles. That is one of the penalties of greatness. Boswell, in any casCj with all his blunt cattdour, made no revelations. to which Johnson, would likely have greatly objected. If . Johnson emerged from the ordeal of Bosswellism with his reputation enhanced, how ranch, more so, virould have Sib Walter Scott I. What would ■. the world not give to-day for even a single volume of the table-talk of Walter' Scott? Yet Lockhar-t succeeds, by means other than those em-' ployed by Boswell, in _ presenting Scott, faithfully, and vividly.. Johnson is familiar, to us through Boswell and Boswelllsm'; Scott'has become not less well known through his sott'in-law, who detested Bos\Vellisni. The two methods have both been crowned with success. F.REi> ekioe Harrison, the doyen of critics, keen and competent, writes in a recent English. review'; "Lock-hart's entire book, long-as it is, and at times Ictn.f/iveilig, brings Scott to us in life. We may all know Scott now at home. He is otir dear familiar friend whom we have known and loved from boyhood." The lessons to be drawn from these illustrious works are apparent. Who can pre* diet what new forms of biography may yet bo discovered?. ,