52 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



circulation is now of no consequence to them), and is injurious not 

 only to modern writers (who are generally made the subject of base 

 comparison), but especially to the utterers of this false coin them- 

 selves. One can not tell falsehoods, even about one's views in litera- 

 ture, without injury to one's morals, yet to " tell the truth and shame 

 the devil " is easy, as it would seem, compared with telling the truth 

 and defying the critics. 



I have alluded to the intrepidity of Miss Bronte in this matter, 

 and, curiously enough, it is women who have the most courage in the 

 expression of their literary opinions. It may be said, of course, that 

 this is due to the audacity of ignorance, and a well-known line may 

 be quoted (for some people, as I have said, are rude) in which certain 

 angels (who are not women) are represented as being afraid to tread 

 in certain places. But I am speaking of women who are great read- 

 ers. Miss Martineau once confessed to me that she could see no 

 beauties in " Tom Jones." " Of course," she said, " the coarseness 

 disgusts me, but, apart from that, I see no sort of merit in it." 

 " What ! " I replied, " no humor, no knowledge of human life '? " 

 " No ; to me it is a wearisome book." 



I disagreed with her very much upon that point, and do so still ; 

 yet, apart from the coarseness (which does not disgust everybody, let 

 me tell you), there is a good deal of tedious reading in " Tom Jones." 

 At all events, that expression of opinion from such lips strikes me as 

 noteworthy. 



It may here be said that there are many English authors of old 

 date, some of whose beauties are unintelligible except to those who 

 are acquainted with the classics ; and " Tom Jones " is one of them. 

 Many of the introductions to the chapters, not to mention a certain 

 travesty of an Homeric battle, must needs be as wearisome to those 

 who are not scholars as the spectacle of a burlesque is to those who 

 have not seen the original play. This is still more the case with our 

 old poets, especially Milton. I very much doubt, in spite of the uni- 

 versal chorus to the contrary, whether " Lycidas " is much admired 

 by readers who are only acquainted with English literature ; I am 

 quite sure it never touched their hearts as, for example, " In Memo- 

 riain" does. 



I once beheld a young lady of great literary taste, and of exquisite 

 sensibility, torn to pieces (figuratively) and trampled upon by a great 

 scholar for venturing to make a comparison between those two poems. 

 Its invocation to the Muses and the general classical air which per- 

 vades it had destroyed for her the pathos of " Lycidas," whereas to 

 her antagonist those very imperfections appeared to enhance its 

 beauty. I did not interfere, because the wretch was her husband, and 

 it would have been worse for her if I had, but my sympathies were 

 entirely with her. Her sad fate for the massacre took place in pub- 

 lic would, I was well aware, have the effect of making people lie 



