LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 131, 27 February 1919, Page 6

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

MODERN WRITERS A REPLY TO CRITICISM. , Sir,—Your correspondent, "Val. Oncyonne," so strongly insists upon tho fact that there are tiro sides to every question that I would almost be inclined to believe him and hail him as an inventive genius wore it not for (he fact that his own letter dispels any illusions he may have entertained on that I score, ijince it shows him to be incapable, as far as literature is concerned, of seeing the strength of those arguments which he roaliy does not attempt to understand. However, discernment, as La Bruyerg says, is the rarest thing in tho world. I am much flattered that ho should dismiss the subject matter in order to discuss my position as a master of gtyle, for evidently lie believes "that in all matters of great importance, style, not sincerity, is the thing." Yet his method of refuting my views is, of course, fallacious—a mere argumentum ad hominem, employed by that type of person who has long been both the_ curse and the amusement of the thinking world: for, if your correspondent has any reasoas for' regarding as false my proposition that moder.i literature gives the best exposition of modern thought, then I should be only too glad to hear them. His one stroke of genuine inspiration—a critical thrust at vny choice of "Madame Bovary"—l parry by pointing out his mistake. Bauikrt wrote "Salarambo" because, as he himself says, ho wished ''to perpetuate a mirage by applying to antiquity the methods of the modern novel." His, work is beautiful, but, nevertheless, from its very nature, artificial. He wrote "Madame Bovary, , liis most perfect achievement, becausa he realised that even in tho humdrum existence of the neurotic Emma, there were materials from which he might lonstruct a prose-poem of extraordinary brilliance and beauty. This is. a psychological study scarcely equalled in any language —a human document so real that people, paradoxically enough, choose to term it fiction. Perhaps, after all, "Val. Oncyonne" believes that .such sex studies are either too dangerous or too commonplaco to be read in ouv schools, perhaps he considers modern life too revolutionary in effect to be investigated by the student, or, possibly, the unconventional morality of an author constitutes a valid reason for thn avoidance of his works.

■Rrnfes?nr Kaintsbnry, i" the article I which "E.M." quotes, gives as reasons j for his not lecturing on the moderns the | fact tha't there is about the past writers "a certain corpus of more or less settled judgment which the professor should vary and fill in": that "the work of contemporary writers is always unsatisfactory to judge"; and that "it is a mistake to thrust in the personality of schoolmaster between student and contemporary poet." dealing with these arguments, I am willing to admit that, for instance, we owe much to the comprehensive and masterly study of Shakespeare by Sir Sidney Lee ; nnd the eidilights thrown by Swinburne, Mnsefield, Dowden. and Harris, but what better employment could these worthies have found if Rome scribe of Shakespeare's, time had understood and interpreted hi 3 greatness. A genius who belongs, in fl sense, to no narticulnr aw, must at all events be influenced bv his own, and, similarly, breathing almost the same atmosphere, the. child of inday can know him l>°tt»r thun f>o youth of to-morrow. So, desp if e what Professor Sainlsbury says. I still maintain thpt I a ■nrofefi'or onsrl't to be competent to indue what nortion of the present-day literature will Iμ of lasting value, and further, thot the student outrht to be imbued with the spirit of his contemporaries, men about whom he may some day write, and by whose nid he will have had simplified to no small degreo thosrt complex forces everywhere actinef around him. As'for the personality of the nvorasre fhoolmasfer. the less 'aid " ,n better. Tt is forbidden Eround which ■Hi* influence" of Milton and Cnrlylo do no* heln to keep -""-dant.

The lotto- of "C.0.P." is a gofcd fxr>.mpl« of Pinnart egotism, garbled with t.he linttled-iin balderdash of one who has either ne'"er been at a university or has irraduated. out of oup. p'hl , . being morely an cxnop'Hon of "C.0.P." in. relation to everything but modern literature., I will iT>t encroach upon your valuable prop* by censuring it. For your oorrpcomlnnt's information, however, I would lit" to point out that Pota■npnliO i* Oil" pf tl<" f"W Unssin-HS who finds in Hip- national npawntry thp samefrim humnuv Hiat Synw find? in lire Trish: whilst, for his' benefit, I would like tn inform him that the, action of the Government in urnhibiting the.saleof "Dainaspd Goods" is evidence rather of the creatness of Brioiix than of any nronosition to the contrary. Political lenders can face everything but the truth of their social evils.

It. is always n. dangerous experiment (o destroy a system without havlnp; a reasonably good substitute as a work- i iiip basis for the new idea; but the inclusion of modern authors in the syllabus of every school, college and uni-. versity need not give rise to the doubts and fears of Mm-nulav when, fifty years nco, in his blind foolishness, he declared that no author then |Hving would be read to-day. I persist in my opinions because in the three letters which I have criticised above there is not one argument which would oauso me to ■chanie them. I would like to eee modern literature promoted, under our educational system, at least to the same ranlras algebra; and to seo displayed, on the part of the teacher of English the same enthusiasm for it as he has for cricket or Territorial training. It seems to my humble judgment that the literary writer of to-day is placed in somewhat the same position as the witch who. linvins been hurled into the river by the jeering mob, was declared guilty if ■she floated and innocent if she sank ((nickly to the bottom, leaving a few 'hubbies' here and there on the surface — T am, etc,, ■ . W.E.L.

ANOTHER CRITIC. Sir,—l confess I had to rub my eyes and read over again the stupendous effusion in TnE Dominion of Saturday, in which the ever inconsequent, but always delightfully interesting, "W.E.L." dogmatises anont tho study of modern English, More I was able to grasp, and then only in sub-conscious manner, the meaning of his would-bo ex cathedra encyclical. It reminded me at the finish of an attempt by Puck .to drill a Eoman legion on the Campus Martins Anyhow what was it.all about? In n delirium of nomenclature he passed from Homer to Theodore do Banville (whoever he may be), lent, perhaps unwittingly, an additional interest to the perennial Shakespearean controversy by calling for a- Fitzgerald to translate the immortal baird, and finally.concocts n devil's slew of Pater, Wilde. Ibsen, Shaw, Syngc, Maeterlinck, et hoe genu;! omne, as a suitable pabulum to broaden the outlook of future generations of New Zealandei-3, and then cunningly seasons the flavour of the brew by throwing in Lionel Johnston and Ledividge, G. R. Barker and G. K. Chesterton, and others, most of whom are defid and cannot protest. As. to the profanity of his introducniß Francis Thompson ; nto his literary Bolshevik motley I say nothing, and leave your readers to decide the desirability of inducing our vouth to assimilate tho doctrines of Turgenev, Tolstoi, Potapenko, Chekov, and the other "flussian realist,?." even though the happy band is fortified with tho blessing and imprimatur of our old friend Nietzsche. Even my typewriter is in revolt at the idea.

I entirely acquit the gonial rresident of the Incorporated taw Society from imy complicity in the drawing up of the proposed programme, tat I cannot, help thinking that "W.E.L" >!oes not even faintly reflpcr what Mr. von Eaast intended. "W.E.T.." reminds one of a purveyor of eclcfitki boots, whose idea of drowsing his window is to fhi'ovt them all without arrangement' there, as an in<lnceinont for possible purchasers to come in and buy on the remote nfl'-chnnee of finding a fit ninid the disordered mass. The older of the Irish have a saying in tlioir intolerance of yout'i. "Even the wisest of boys will come to troublo when teaching his grandmother luuv to suckduck eggs," and so has "W.E.L." come, to grief when he sets ouit to po=e as a schoolmaster. We haw advanced, perhaps too rapidly, in some matters educational, for our contentment and betterment, but I sincwely hope that Mr. Hanan will pause before ho even tacitly anuroves -of the eralio Dot oourri cata-

levied by "W.E.L." as a standard of modern English educational requirement. - 1 am ' et °- S.H.M. February 24.