On this page
- Departments (2)
-
Text (6)
-
November £7, 1852.] THE LEADER. 1141
-
iCiftruto.
-
rvitics are ndt the legislators, but the...
-
« If I steal from the ancients," says La...
-
<^06lJf€.
-
Jiasil: a Story of Modern ' Life. IVy W....
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
November £7, 1852.] The Leader. 1141
November £ 7 , 1852 . ] THE LEADER . 1141
Iciftruto.
iCiftruto .
Rvitics Are Ndt The Legislators, But The...
rvitics are ndt the legislators , but the judges and police of literature . They do not make laws—they interpret and try to enforcethem . — Edinburgh . Review .
« If I Steal From The Ancients," Says La...
« If I steal from the ancients , " says Lacon , " it is eried up as erudition j if I steal from the moderns it is cried down as plagiarism . " This is one of the flashy and foolish epigrams in which that overrated work abounds . The distinction between erudition and plagiarism does not lie there , but in the open avowal of erudition , and the attempted concealment of plagiarism . it is the distinction between borrowing and stealing . The works of the ancients are , or are supposed to be , open to all , known to all , therefore common property . When we adopt an image from Homer , or a sarcasm from Hoba . ce , it is not always necessary to give the original , or to mention the obligation , because we know that the passage must be familiar to thousands , and no one will accuse us of a desire to shine by borrowed lustre . When Boileau
says" Chassez le naturel il revient au galop , " every Latinist knows the passage he is paraphrasing , and no one supposes Boileau to be plagiarizing : II reprend son Men oil il le irouve . When a man like Mr . Gkote quotes copiously from German writers , we speak of that quotation as erudition ; but when a man like Coleridge brings forward , as his own , ideas and metaphors , reasonings and illustratrations , which he has translated from Schelling , and thereby attempts to gain acceptance as a philosopher , we call that plagiarism ; for Schellin was known to very few , and the chances of detection were slight .
It is perfectly impossible for any writer or speaker not to borrow ideas , images , and illustrations from some predecessor or predecessors ; but the public justly discriminates between the borrowing which may be called intellectual assimilation , the borrowing which may be called erudition , and the borrowing which must be called plagiarism . Let friends and critics put forward what excuse they may , the moral sense of the public is not to be led astray on those points . And with respect to the great Disraeli
case , this week varying the gossip of all circles , we do not think there can be any real difference of opinion . The charge against him is that he has been guilty of a plagiarism , and under circumstances which aggravate the offence . The source from which he borrowed the passage was an extremely obscure one ; the letter of Mr . Smythe , which attempts to explain the mystery , only serves to show how vividly Disraeli remembered the source from which he was borrowing ; so that the want of openness , which constitutes the crime of plagiarism , is demonstrable .
The Times has , however , attempte d to vindicate its friend . It has done so with its usual ability . It has put the very best face on the matter ; but it has not removed one tittle of the evidence upon which the public judged . What we last week said en badinage about Disraeli referring to his common-place book , the Times gravely assures us was the laudable process by which the orator manufactured his oration , and calls upon all orators to do likewise . The Times does more than this . It endeavours to divert the attention from the plagiarism to a question of literary convenance , and in so doing lends its powerful advocacy to what we consider a most dangerous cause , and one which is too much in harmony with some prevailing misconceptions on the literary function , not to extort from us a protest .
" Now , we beg 1 to suggest to those gentlemen , whether it is worth their while to bo flinging us much dirt a . s they can on the only litterateur who has over yofc succeeded in breaking that Nolid aristocraticnl phalanx which has hitherto monopolized the high offices of the State ; . Why arc authors to drag down evory ono of their fraternity who may happen to become a Minister of State ? It is thus that literatim ; cuts its own throat in this country . Wo may depend upon it , that authors will never have their proper consideration , in the face of dukes , millionaires , squires , and m-ize cattle , till they are loyal to their own body , and help one another
to rise , when the opportunity oilers . Chastise Disraeli ' s political errors as much as yon plonso , hut don't hoi ]) the country party to throw off tho accomplished horseman who is riding them with Kuch admirable effect . We are delighted to see them put through their paeon by one not of themselves . They would rather , of course , he were : t descendant ; of William the Conqueror , oven though ho had a dozen bars <> f hustardy in the quartering * of his shield . Unfortunately , however , the aristocracy of England is not fertile in Ministerial or any other talent , and they are forced to look abroad , not only for money , hut eve )) for intellect . Their necessity
ls the opportunity of literature , and we trust , it will turn to good account . This appeals to authors through their weak points—1 st , the desire to ' > e . " recognized" by dukes und millionaires ( a supremely indifferent rcsul ^ p ( l ) » " " nature's aristocrats" to desire !); and , L ' ndly , the mistaken ambition () f becoming Cabinet Ministers , " as they do in Franco . " <> u the question of literary dignity , The . Leader luis never heen silent whi'ii lit opportunity offered ; but we place that dignity in loyalty to Truth "" d in unostentatious self-respect , not in getting ducnl " recognition" —not
• ii helping authors to a seat in the Cabinet . It seems to us that if men would do their work honestly , with labour and with love , with patience and with loyalty , and find it of more intrinsic worth to realize their aims than ' <> realize dueul recognition ; il " , when their work was done , they would »« 'Kpect the dignity of literature , so far as not . to tamper with their critics , Ol HianuMivre to '' get praised in the newspapers ; " if they would speak ° " < . iu all honesty , the thought that lives within them , and not keep the 'bought suppressed , or utter it in equivocal language , for fear of losing " recognition ; " if they would bear in mind that tijncukuig the truth WftH
their specific function in this world , and that in proportion as they spoke what they knew was not the truth , they were disloyal to Literature ; if they would do this , and more , their " dignity" would need no bulwark * ! Let us cite a recent instance . A gentleman holding a public position , and known to the writer of these lines , published a very foolish book . He sent it to The Leader , heralding it with a charming note , in which he asked if it woidd be noticed . The reply was , that if the book were not on a subject lying beyond the province of the journal , it would certainly be noticed . On inspection , it turned out to be a work so foolish that , in accordance with our plan never to occupy space unnecessarily , we thrust it aside . After several indirect applications , in the shape of notes , inquiring
when the review could appear , and highly laudatory criticisms extracted from other papers obligingly forwarded , we presume , to show us what a remarkable book it w as thought by others , our reserve was broken , and we expressed briefly , yet plainly , what we did think of the book . We made an enemy for life ; " but that ' s not much ; " the point of the story is , that the indignant author , having failed in his manoeuvres , actually wrote this reproach : " You promised to review my work favourably , as all the other papers did . What was your promise worth ? " The unhappy man could not understand a promise to review his work otherwise than as a pledge to review it favourably !
What says the Dignity of Literature to such things ? They are of daily occurrence . And until men learn that writing a lie is not less dishonourable than telling a lie , these things must continue . The reform , therefore , must be a moral , not a political , reform . Men must not shrink from speaking their thoughts , even , of Chancellors and eminent authors who have broken the aristocratical phalanx . If Disraeli is guilty of plagiarism , and the plagiarism be a reprehensible one , all the mob of authors' * were bound to do that which the Times sneers at them for doing . They were bound not to 'bate their breath because the offender was high-placed . It is snobbishness to suggest such a course .
The feeling to which the Times indirectly appeals is the desire for some corporate action on the part of authors , the desire to band writers together in a fraternity like lawyers , physicians , clergymen , and others ; by means of which their " status" may be elevated , and the Cabinet opened to a few . "We so strongly oppose this desire , that , as the subject is important , we shall ask permission to return to it . Meanwhile , having made a protest , we pass on to say that the Times hits wide of the mark in this attack upon the authors ; firstly , because Disraeli cannot fairly be said to have broken the aristocratic phalanx by means of literature , although he lias found literature useful as an ally : secondly , because Macaulay , who is , par excellence , a Man of Letters , has also broken the phalanx , has been a minister , was carried there by Literature , and has uniformly been treated by all men of letters with that respect due to an honourable and consistent course , a respect which does not exclude frank opinion .
We sum up by saying that the charge of plagiarism has been clearly made out against Disraeli , and that the " mob of authors" were more than justified in exposing him ; they were bound by their office to do so without reticence or " brotherly feeling . " Is Jones to be scarified for his " barefaced plagiarism , " when perhaps he steals to keep alive a family , and Disraeli not to be exposed for the same offence , when the mere vanity of oratorical display is the motive ? " A question not to be asked 1 "
≪^06ljf€.
<^ 06 lJf € .
Jiasil: A Story Of Modern ' Life. Ivy W....
Jiasil : a Story of Modern ' Life . IVy W . Wilkio Collins , ( author of Antonlna , Ac . 3 vols . JJenlley . Uasil is emphatically a Story . It is not . a collection of sketches , Hatirieal and pathetic , threaded by a narrative of more or less interest , nueli as tho modern novel commonly is ; but a story filling the t hreo volumes , —never for one moment lost . sight of by the writer , —never retiring to the second place , while episodic or philosophic- matter usurps the scene . Ami this story hurries you alonfj with it . in huoIi continued and breathless interest , tliat go on you must ; without pause to the end . As may he supposed , wo are somewhat hardenec ^ novel-readern ; the fascination exercised by
iietion over the youthful mind cannot often he exercised on the critic , who in the course of duty has to read ho many novels that he knows every trick and winding of the story ; yet we must declare that lia . sif . forced us to do that which we have not done for years— -to load tho whole at ; ono sitting . As a , Story , then , . / A * . v / 7 fulfils to perfection , tho primary requisite of keeping attention fixed and eager . That Wilkio Collins possesses tho dillieult art , Vart de confer , in tin extraordinary decree , this story amply proves , for its narrative skill is so great as to overcome all sense of improbability and unreality , and to force attention in their despite . So rarean accomplishment is this of story telling that it merits peculiar notice .
Were the author of liasil . simply a writer for circulating libraries , our criticism would probably end here . lie resolved on writing a story that should gras p tho mind with unrehix , ing vigour ; what be resolved to do ho has done . Hut i . s this all wo , his friends and the public , have a right to demand of him P Nay , is it till that lie himself professes to have done ? By no means , Wilkie Collins is a Man of Letters , who regards his Profession with respect , and bis Art with love ; criticism therefore with him must use no moro courtesy than the courtesy of friendship , which so far from excluding candour , i / is /' . sls on if . Il <> rightly claims to he triod by a high standard : — " Bot , wecn tho purpose hinted at here , and the execution of that purpose eonfamed in tho succeeding pages , lies the hroud line of separation which distingu ' iHhoti between the will and the deed . How far I may fall short of another man ' s ntundurd , roinaijuw to ho discovered ; lul how far 1 liavo fallen / short of my own , I know
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Nov. 27, 1852, page 17, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_27111852/page/17/
-