You are here
قراءة كتاب A Novelist on Novels
تنويه: تعرض هنا نبذة من اول ١٠ صفحات فقط من الكتاب الالكتروني، لقراءة الكتاب كاملا اضغط على الزر “اشتر الآن"
A NOVELIST ON NOVELS
BY THE SAME AUTHOR
NOVELS:
A BED OF ROSES
THE CITY OF NIGHT
ISRAEL KALISCH[1]
THE MAKING OF AN ENGLISHMAN[2]
THE SECOND BLOOMING
THE STRANGERS' WEDDING
OLGA NAZIMOV (Short Stories)
MISCELLANEOUS:
WOMAN AND TO-MORROW
ANATOLE FRANCE
DRAMATIC ACTUALITIES
THE INTELLIGENCE OF WOMAN ETC.
A NOVELIST
ON
NOVELS
BY
W. L. GEORGE
LONDON: 48 PALL MALL
W. COLLINS SONS & CO. LTD.
GLASGOW MELBOURNE AUCKLAND
Copyright 1918
NOTE
The chapters that follow have been written in varying moods, and express the fluctuating feelings aroused in the author by the modern novel and its treatment at the hands of the public. Though unrelated with the novel, the chapters on 'Falstaff,' 'The Esperanto of Art,' and 'The Twilight of Genius' have been included, either because artistically in keeping with other chapters, or because their general implications affect the fiction form.
A half of the book has not before now been published in Great Britain and Dominions.
CONTENTS
PAGE | |
A DECEPTIVE DEDICATION | 1 |
LITANY OF THE NOVELIST | 24 |
WHO IS THE MAN? | 62 |
THREE YOUNG NOVELISTS: | |
1. D. H. LAWRENCE | 90 |
2. AMBER REEVES | 101 |
3. SHEILA KAYE-SMITH | 109 |
FORM AND THE NOVEL | 118 |
SINCERITY: THE PUBLISHER AND THE POLICEMAN | 124 |
THREE COMIC GIANTS: | |
1. TARTARIN | 147 |
2. FALSTAFF | 161 |
3. MÜNCHAUSEN | 177 |
THE ESPERANTO OF ART | 191 |
THE TWILIGHT OF GENIUS | 208 |
A Deceptive Dedication
I
I have shown the manuscript of this book to a well-known author. One of those staid, established authors whose venom has been extracted by the mellow years. My author is beyond rancour and exploit; he has earned the right to bask in his own celebrity, and needs to judge no more, because no longer does he fear judgment. He is like a motorist who has sowed his wild petrol. He said to me: 'You are very, very unwise. I never criticise my contemporaries, and, believe me, it doesn't pay.' Well, I am unwise; I always was unwise, and this has paid in a coin not always recognised, but precious to a man's spiritual pride. Why should I not criticise my contemporaries? It is not a merit to be a contemporary. Also, they can return the compliment; some of them, if I may venture upon a turn of phrase proper for Mr Tim Healy, have returned the compliment before they got it. It may be unwise, but I join with Voltaire in thanking God that he gave us folly. So I will affront the condemnatory vagueness of wool and fleecy cloud, be content to think that nobody will care where I praise, that everybody will think me impertinent where I judge. I will be content to believe that the well-known author will not mind if I criticise him, and that the others will not mind either. I will hope, though something of a Sadducee, that there is an angel in their hearts.
I want to criticise them and their works because I think the novel, this latest born of literature, immensely interesting and important. It is interesting because, more faithfully than any other form, it expresses the mind of man, his pains that pass, his hopes that fade and are born again, his discontent pregnant with energy, the unrulinesses in which he misspends his vigour, the patiences that fit him to endure all things even though he dare them not. In this, all other forms fail: history, because it chronicles battles and dates, yet not the great movements of the peoples; economics, because in their view all men are vile; biography, because it leads the victim to the altar, but never sacrifices it. Even poetry fails; I do not try to shock, but I doubt whether the poetic is equal to the prose form.
I do not want to fall into the popular fallacy that prose and poetry each have their own field, strictly preserved, for prose is not always prosy, nor poetry always poetic; prose may contain poetry, poetry cannot contain prose, just as some gentlemen are bounders, but no bounders are gentlemen. But the admiration many people feel