402 AMKRICAN BEE JOURNAL-. 



SUGGESXIONS ABOUT APIARIAIN " KIIVKS." 



BY F. L. THOMPSON. 



The editor makes a good point on page 103, when he asks, " Have you dis- 

 covered any new kinks that are worth knowing ?" Our bee-papers are already 

 about as good as they can be editorially, but there is plenty of room for improve- 

 ment on the part of contributors. We all know the man who successfully runs large 

 apiaries and attends all conventions, at which he is continually letting fall words of 

 wisdom in the shape of kinks — though even there he does it principally in conver- 

 sation before and after — but the bee-papers never hear from him. 



It has been said that the periodicals have gradually taken to themselves all 

 functions of conventions except the face to face meeting. It ought to be so ; but it 

 is not entirely so yet, by any means. Mr. Hasty says it is because most bee-keepers 

 don't know how to write. I don't believe it. It is because they have not the right 

 attitude of mind toward writing of this kind. If by association of ideas a man 

 unites in his mind the Century, The Nation, or Harper's Monthly with the American 

 Bee Journal, and does not write for the latter because he could not for the former, 

 that does not prevent him from writing business letters which are plain and to the 

 point. 



The American Bee Journal needs no more style from its contributors than a 

 collection of business letters would. Besides, we are working toward a plain and 

 simple style even in purely literary performances ; unless we except certain erratic 

 schools of poetry, which do not concern sensible people. Indeed, one characteristic 

 of modern style is the absence of style. The matter is looked to more sharply than 

 the manner. Practical men like bee-keepers have nothing to fear on that score. 

 The Senate Chamber no longer resounds with stately imitations of Burke and Web- 

 ster. It would be considered bad taste. W. D. Howells, the greatest living Ameri- 

 can novelist, takes particular pains to erase all passages from his works which 

 sound too literary. 



But, after all, it does not matter so much in what shape the kinks come, as that 

 we get them all right. If a kink is spread over a page, which might be put in a 

 paragraph, let us be thankful it is no worse. We want kinks. If we don't help 

 one another to them, we shall not get them. The bee-books contain a few, but only 

 .1 few ; revisions occur too seldom, and there is not room enough for them all, any- 

 how. I cannot agree with Mr. Heddon in thinking it best to compress everything 

 into the smallest possible compass. That is all right as a department of bee-litera- 

 ture ; but it would be a serious blow to progress if it was the whole of it. Plenty of 

 kinks are the life and soul of bee-culture. By their aid we comprehend the essen- 

 tial principles much more fully than we otherwise could. We need such periodicals 

 as the Review ; but no less do we need the American Bee Journal and Gleanings. 

 Concentrated food alone, weakens the digestive powers. 



But, it may be said, it is the business of editors to prod up the successful men, 

 as they know "who rides this hobby and who that," in Mr. Hutchinson's words. 

 That may be; and in the essential principles of bee-keeping this plan leaves nothing 

 to be desired ; but in the department of kinks, to .judge by results, they do not reach 

 one onc-huudreth of the men we ought to hoar from, nor is it to bo expected. To 

 get kinks, wc must look to the number, as well as the reputation, of bee-keepers. 

 One would think, for instance, that R. L. Taylor would be an experiment station in 

 himself ; but one of the first things he did on being appointed was to ask for sug- 

 gestions — not from a select few, whose names were known — but from everybody who 

 is a practical bee-keeper. Let us not forget, in our zeal at condensing, boiling 

 down, getting the "cream" — that the "General Public" is an old veteran at bee- 



