A LITERARY LOG.

Southland Times, Issue 18840, 5 June 1920, Page 11

A LITERARY LOG.

( ABOUT BOOKS & BOOKMEN. ~]

jßy “lota.”) June 5, 1920 Superiority of Women. —Mary Johnston, in her series of short stone® collected under the title “The W anderer-i,” traces the ascent of woman as the leader of man, his superior in intellect and mental daring. It is an absorbing book. The stories .are entirely unrelated, but they represent a progression through the ages from the apes to the .lays of the French revolution in the eighteen:!! century. It is impossible to give any idea of these sketches, but one may say quite candidly that Mary Johnston can number them among her most interesting productions. The writer reveals a mote than usual versatility and in most of the stories, at any rate, she catches the light atmosphere to give the study the ring of actuality. Many people have ;m antipathy to short stories, but "The Wanderers” will do much to overcome that distaste and for that reason 1 cheerfully recommend it. There is no brilliant use of the anti-chmax such as you find in O. Henry, no straining for effect, but every unit in the whole .-trikes one as being the sober truth, while retaining a considerable amount of dramatic force. “The Wanderers” is published by Constable’s, my copy coming from the Australasian Publishing Co. of Sydney.

The Romance of the Forest. —The N.Z. Department of Forestry has done well to issue the first part of "New Zealand Forestry,” by Sir 11. 1-;. Hull bins, to the public at a remarkably low price. We are woefully ignorant in this country of the wonderful wealth that our lou-ts hold for us, and anything that can t' 1 .-cover their remarkable value to ii.- is ot immense value. In this book Sir D. K. Hutchins deals chicily with the kauri fore.-ts of the North Island and he disctissi s methods by which they can, even at this late (lay, be made into an immense industry. If the author had been content to furnish the department with a dry-as-dust report in severely official language no one could have quarrelled with him, but he has given us a book which reads something like a romance, in spite of the terrible mistakes in our treatment of the forest lands of the do ninion that it reveals. Sir D. E. Hutchins shows in this work that even ii half a million acres of kauri land can be saved tor the dominion they can be made evenii'ally to give us a return more than enough to pay tne cost of the Great War to the dominion. It sounds like optimism itmc mail, but the author s arguments arc impressive and we hope that neither the public nor the politicians will overlook them. My copy comes from the Department of Forestry, iiom wnich copies may be obtained for two si-filings. A New Shakespeare.—Though the Bacon theory seems to leave 10.-t the greater part of its vigour, the list of claimants to the authorship of the plays credited to Shakespeare is steadily growing. One bright American persuaded himself that in the ooze of "The Wash were hidden proofs that would substantiate a claim by the Duke of Rutland, but a mud-raking expedition blew the theory to pieces. Now there has appeared “Shakespeare Identified” ( Palmer; by .1. Thomas Looney—no puns need be made on the name however tempting—to show that Edward de Vere. 17th Earl of Oxford was the culprit. It must be remembered that the evidence being amassed against the Stratford man looks impressive, whatever may be our private opinions on the matter. Mr Looney's book sets out much of this evidence for the appellants. He begins by restating the familiar anomalies between the plays and the ascertained facts of the reputed author's life. Thc.-e make a list great in length and significance. The writer of the play-, Mr F.oouey argues, reveals an expert knowledge of law such as Shakespeare could hardly lie exjiected to j>osscss, he had i first-hand knowledge of classics, idiomatic Kren-h and Italian. These things could not have been learned at Stratford. Dirt and ignorance were stamped on Shakespeare's family life; his parents were illiterate; there is no evidence that he was ever inside a school; few at Stratford were capable of instructing him in the rudiments of education. Mr Looney admit- that humble genius sometimes overcomes such obstacles, but contends mat Shake-pearc's work never suggests a genius emerged from the multitude. He must have had numerous books and studied these thoroughly. Yet Stratford was known as a bookless neighbourhood, and Shakespeare's occupations were non-intellectual. Proceeding to "rub it in,” Mr Looney declares that the coarse circumstances of his life and the cultured character of his work are irreconcilable. The will is examined. Mr Looney points to the fact that he makes no disposition of his. plays; (here are only ,-ix of his signatures*.

and not- one of them is connected with literary matter, hut ail of them prove him to he a most, inexpert penman. Of his London life practically nothing is known except that he was a defaulting taxpayer for whom the authorities were searching. At a time when literary men inferior to Shakespeare were the regular correspondents of the aristocratic patrons of literature there is no evidence that Shakespeare ever corresponded with a single soul. A ct. in sfrite of all his disadvantages this man, when only 20. produced an elaborate poem in polished English. evincing an accurate knowledge of the classics, and. later, the Shakespearian dramas. It was the greatest work of self-development genius ever performer!, says this new doubter, but. having performed it. Shakespeare retired to Stratford and devoted himself to making malt and making money. displaying no further trace of intellectual and literary interest. That with such a beginning he could have attained to such heights Mr I-ooney find.- it difficult to believe; more difficult to believe that, having risen to such heights,' he should have fallen to the level of his closing period. Hut if not Sha.ke.speare, who was it? Why the anonymity? The vocation of dramatic writer certainly was scarcely respectable. To have laid claim to the authorship of the plays would have been of no assistance to any man solicitous | for the social dignity of his family. To determine the question of identity, therefore. Mr Looney discarding all prepossessions, closely examined the plays, so as to form ,-ome conception of the man who wrote them ; then he sought for such a man. Maturity of years, genius, intense sensibility, pronounced liferary tastes, enthusiasm for the drama, talent for lyrical poetry, srrperinr education, association with educated people these and many other subtle qualities, he says, were necessary in the man who wrote the Shakespeare plays. After a most exhaustive process of elimination and comparison the author reaches the conclusion that the “alleged works” of William Shakrsneare were written hv Edward Ae Vere. 17th Earl of Oxford. The process i'- ingenious, the reasoning plausible. The conclusions are not always convincing but, they cannot, he lightly thrust aside. A comparison of the work of the two men reveals amazing similarity in mentality and literary style'. A remarkable series of coincidences is established, not only between the literary works, but also between the circumstances of Edward de Vere and the conditions essential to the writer of the Shakespearian dramas. The sonnets furnish for Mr Looney further and even stronger proofs. Incidents in plays and sentiments in. poems correspond with authenticated facts in Oxford’s Lfe, The synchrony is too sustained end harmonious rn be dismissed as fancy. The life facts arc even more confirmatory than the literary facts. The Earl of Oxford died in 1 f>o4. In the previous six years thirteen, plays of Shakespeare were printed for the first time. The publication of Shakespeare’s plays was arrested in a marked degree after the death of Oxford. A flood of Shakespearian plays was published authentically right up to the year before Oxford’s death, then a sudden stop, end nothmg more published with any appearance of proper authorisation for nearly twenty years. The Sonnets Shnkesi>eare had been writing during many preceding ‘ years abruptly ce*‘ - ed at the time of Ox- i

ford's death. In that year Shakespeare retired to obscurity in Stratford. The writer, in his conclusion, claims that his case for Edward de Vere as the author of the Shakespeare publications is unimpeachably proven, but people are hardly ready to go that far—l certainly am not. As in all special pleading, there is a strong if unintentional tendency to suppress evidence favourable to the contrary view. ,Mr Looney’s theory, however, is interesting and is certainly more calculated to win support than did the Donnelly cryptogram. The book merits the attention of the Shakespearian student, and is certain to revive interest in an old and seemingly endless problem. ♦<>♦<>♦ Some New Punblications.—Constables are publishing a new novel by Ellen Thornsycroft Fowler entitled “Beauty and Bands.” This is the first novel from her pen for some considerable time. John Lane’s list includes “The Breathless Moment” by Muriel Hine, who wrote “Earth.” Grant Richards, the author-publisher who wrote “Caviare,” is issuing a new story called “Double Life.” The latest production of the pen of “George A. Birmingham,” is published by Murray. It is called “Good Conduct.” Readers of S.P.B. Mala will be interested to learn that his latest novel “Uncle Lionel” will be available in New Zealand shortly. Mais has a wide audience and his writings thoroughly deserve their popularity.

J. L. Garvin is writing a life of Joseph Chamberlain, and in taking up that task he has the blessing and support of the Imperialist’s son, Austen.