some anomalies of the short story-第3部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


facilities　for　repetition；　and　so　can　stamp　its　persons　more　indelibly　on
the　imagination　than　the　narrative　form　in　the　same　small　space。　　The
narrative　must　give　to　description　what　the　drama　trusts　to
representation；　but　this　cannot　account　for　the　superior　permanency　of
the　dramatic　types　in　so　great　measure　as　we　might　at　first　imagine；　for
they　remain　as　much　in　mind　from　reading　as　from　seeing　the　plays。　　It　is
possible　that　as　the　novella　becomes　more　conscious；　its　persons　will
become　more　memorable；　but　as　it　is；　though　we　now　vividly　and　with
lasting　delight　remember　certain　short　stories；　we　scarcely　remember　by
name　any　of　the　people　in　them。　　I　may　be　risking　too　much　in　offering　an
instance；　but　who；　in　even　such　signal　instances　as　The　Revolt　of　Mother；
by　Miss　Wilkins；　or　The　Dulham　Ladies；　by　Miss　Jewett；　can　recall　by　name
the　characters　that　made　them　delightful？




VI。

The　defect　of　the　novella　which　we　have　been　acknowledging　seems　an
essential　limitation；　but　perhaps　it　is　not　insuperable；　and　we　may　yet
have　short　stories　which　shall　supply　the　delighted　imagination　with
creations　of　as　much　immortality　as　we　can　reasonably　demand。　　The
structural　change　would　not　be　greater　than　the　moral　or　material　change
which　has　been　wrought　in　it　since　it　began　as　a　yarn；　gross　and
palpable；　which　the　narrator　spun　out　of　the　coarsest　and　often　the
filthiest　stuff；　to　snare　the　thick　fancy　or　amuse　the　lewd　leisure　of
listeners　willing　as　children　to　have　the　same　persons　and　the　same
things　over　and　over　again。　　Now　it　has　not　only　varied　the　persons　and
things；　but　it　has　refined　and　verified　them　in　the　direction　of　the
natural　and　the　supernatural；　until　it　is　above　all　other　literary　forms
the　vehicle　of　reality　and　spirituality。　　When　one　thinks　of　a　bit　of　Mr。
James's　psychology　in　this　form；　or　a　bit　of　Verga's　or　Kielland's
sociology；　or　a　bit　of　Miss　Jewett's　exquisite　veracity；　one　perceives
the　immense　distance　which　the　short　story　has　come　on　the　way　to　the
height　it　has　reached。　　It　serves　equally　the　ideal　and　the　real；　that
which　it　is　loath　to　serve　is　the　unreal；　so　that　among　the　short　stories
which　have　recently　made　reputations　for　their　authors　very　few　are　of
that　peculiar　cast　which　we　have　no　name　for　but　romanticistic。　　The　only
distinguished　modern　writer　of　romanticistic　novelle　whom　I　can　think　of
is　Mr。　Bret　Harte；　and　he　is　of　a　period　when　romanticism　was　so
imperative　as　to　be　almost　a　condition　of　fiction。　　I　am　never　so
enamoured　of　a　cause　that　I　will　not　admit　facts　that　seem　to　tell
against　it；　and　I　will　allow　that　this　writer　of　romanticistic　short
stories　has　more　than　any　other　supplied　us　with　memorable　types　and
characters。　　We　remember　Mr。　John　Oakhurst　by　name；　we　remember　Kentuck
and　Tennessee's　Partner；　at　least　by　nickname；　and　we　remember　their
several　qualities。　　These　figures；　if　we　cannot　quite　consent　that　they
are　persons；　exist　in　our　memories　by　force　of　their　creator's
imagination；　and　at　the　moment　I　cannot　think　of　any　others　that　do；
out　of　the　myriad　of　American　short　stories；　except　Rip　Van　Winkle　out　of
Irving's　Legend　of　Sleepy　Hollow；　and　Marjorie　Daw　out　of　Mr。　Aldrich's
famous　little　caprice　of　that　title；　and　Mr。　James's　Daisy　Miller。

It　appears　to　be　the　fact　that　those　writers　who　have　first　distinguished
themselves　in　the　novella　have　seldom　written　novels　of　prime　order。
Mr。　Kipling　is　an　eminent　example；　but　Mr。　Kipling　has　yet　a　long　life
before　him　in　which　to　upset　any　theory　about　him；　and　one　can　only
instance　him　provisionally。　　On　the　other　hand；　one　can　be　much　more
confident　that　the　best　novelle　have　been　written　by　the　greatest
novelists；　conspicuously　Maupassant；　Verga；　Bjornson；　Mr。　Thomas　Hardy；
Mr。　James；　Mr。　Cable；　Tourguenief；　Tolstoy；　Valdes；　not　to　name　others。
These　have；　in　fact；　all　done　work　so　good　in　this　form　that　one　is
tempted　to　call　it　their　best　work。　　It　is　really　not　their　best；　but　it
is　work　so　good　that　it　ought　to　have　equal　acceptance　with　their　novels；
if　that　distinguished　editor　was　right　who　said　that　short　stories　sold
well　when　they　were　good　short　stories。　　That　they　ought　to　do　so　is　so
evident　that　a　devoted　reader　of　them；　to　whom　I　was　submitting　the
anomaly　the　other　day；　insisted　that　they　did。　　I　could　only　allege　the
testimony　of　publishers　and　authors　to　the　contrary；　and　this　did　not
satisfy　him。

It　does　not　satisfy　me；　and　I　wish　that　the　general　reader；　with　whom　the
fault　lies；　could　be　made　to　say　why；　if　he　likes　one　short　story　by
itself　and　four　short　stories　in　a　magazine；　he　does　not　like；　or　will
not　have；　a　dozen　short　stories　in　a　book。　　This　was　the　baffling
question　which　I　began　with　and　which　I　find　myself　forced　to　end　with；
after　all　the　light　I　have　thrown　upon　the　subject。　　I　leave　it　where　I
found　it；　but　perhaps　that　is　a　good　deal　for　a　critic　to　do。　　If　I　had
left　it　anywhere　else　the　reader　might　not　feel　bound　to　deal　with　it
practically　by　reading　all　the　books　of　short　stories　he　could　lay　hands
on；　and　either　divining　why　he　did　not　enjoy　them；　or　else　forever
foregoing　his　prejudice　against　them　because　of　his　pleasure　in　them。







End