The Principles of Success in Literature | Page 8

he give us of his best, and his best cannot be another's. The facts seen
through the vision of another, reported on the witness of another, may
be true, but the reporter cannot vouch for them. Let the original
observer speak for himself. Otherwise only rumours are set afloat. If
you have never seen an acid combine with a base you cannot
instructively speak to me of salts; and this, of course, is true in a more
emphatic degree with reference to more complex matters.
Personal experience is the basis of all real Literature. The writer must
have thought the thoughts, seen the objects (with bodily or mental
vision), and felt the feelings; otherwise he can have no power over us.
Importance does not depend on rarity so much as on authenticity. The
massacre of a distant tribe, which is heard through the report of others,
falls far below the heart-shaking effect of a murder committed in our
presence. Our sympathy with the unknown victim may originally have
been as torpid as that with the unknown tribe; but it has been kindled
by the swift and vivid suggestions of details visible to us as spectators;
whereas a severe and continuous effort of imagination is needed to call
up the kindling suggestions of the distant massacre.
So little do writers appreciate the importance of direct vision and
experience, that they are in general silent about what they themselves
have seen and felt, copious in reporting the experience of others. Nay,
they are urgently prompted to say what they know others think, and
what consequently they themselves may be expected to think. They are
as if dismayed at their own individuality, and suppress all traces of it in
order to catch the general tone. Such men may, indeed, be of service in

the ordinary commerce of Literature as distributors. All I wish to point
out is that they are distributors, not producers. The commerce may be
served by second-hand reporters, no less than by original seers; but we
must understand this service to be commercial and not literary. The
common stock of knowledge gains from it no addition. The man who
detects a new fact, a new property in a familiar substance, adds to the
science of the age; but the man who expounds the whole system of the
universe on the reports of others, unenlightened by new conceptions of
his own, does not add a grain to the common store. Great writers may
all be known by their solicitude about authenticity. A common incident,
a simple phenomenon, which has been a part of their experience, often
undergoes what may be called "a transfiguration" in their souls, and
issues in the form of Art; while many world-agitating events in which
they have not been acters, or majestic phenomena of which they were
never spectators, are by them left to the unhesitating incompetence of
writers who imagine that fine subjects make fine works. Either the
great writer leaves such materials untouched, or he employs them as the
vehicle of more cherished, because more authenticated tidings,--he
paints the ruin of an empire as the scenic background for his picture of
the distress of two simple hearts. The inferior writer, because he lays no
emphasis on authenticity, cannot understand this avoidance of
imposing themes. Condemned by naive incapacity to be a reporter, and
not a seer, he hopes to shine by the reflected glory of his subjects. It is
natural in him to mistake ambitious art for high art. He does not feel
that the best is the highest.
I do not assert that inferior writers abstain from the familiar and trivial.
On the contrary, as imitators, they imitate everything which great
writers have shown to be sources of interest. But their bias is towards
great subjects. They make no new ventures in the direction of personal
experience. They are silent on all that they have really seen for
themselves. Unable to see the deep significance of what is common,
they spontaneously turn towards the uncommon.
There is, at the present day, a fashion in Literature, and in Art generally,
which is very deporable, and which may, on a superficial glance,
appear at variance with what has just been said. The fashion is that of

coat-and-waistcoat realism, a creeping timidity of invention, moving
almost exclusively amid scenes of drawing-room existence, with all the
reticences and pettinesses of drawing-room conventions. Artists have
become photographers, and have turned the camera upon the vulgarities
of life, instead of representing the more impassioned movements of life.
The majority of books and pictures are addressed to our lower faculties;
they make no effort as they have no power to stir our deeper emotions
by the contagion of great ideas. Little that makes life noble and solemn
is reflected in the Art of