REALISM IN THE NOVELS OF WILLIAM DEM HOWELLS

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF ATLANTA UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

BY

BEULAH LEE JONES

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

ATLANTA, GEORGIA

AUGUST, 1948

/ l/ ii

PREFACE

William Dean. Howells was one of the pioneers of a literary movement

in American literature known as realism. Like all pioneers, he has been

highly praised and adversely criticized. It is noteworthy that these ap¬

praisals have often been made without due regard to Howells’ creed, and

that many of the studies of his novels have been in the nature of compara¬

tive studies, with varied concepts of realism as criteria, rather than

Howells' own doctrine of realism. Such practices in the evaluation of ones works without examining the theory that underlies them often leads to faulty

criticism. Realizing this, the writer of this thesis purposes to evaluate

Howells’ fictional practices in the light of his literary theory.

Of the many studies made of Howells, the writer is aware of only three

detailed ones. Delmar Gross Cooke, Oscar W. Firkins, and Alexander Harvey

are the scholars who made these. Each of their works is entitled William

Dean Howells. In most anthologies and all histories of American literature

there is a discussion of Hov/ells' realism. Many contributions of this nature

have been made to periodicals. However, with the exception of the study made

by Russell Blankenship, ^ they all fall into the category of comparative stud¬

ies. Herein, then, lies the significance of this thesis—it purposes to

analyze a cross section of the critical estimates of Howells' realism in or¬

der to point out that Howells' own theory of literature is often neglected

in the appraisal of his work; to ascertain, in detail, Howells' literary

creed; and finally to illustrate the digressions that he made from his creed

^Russell Blankenshijy in his book, American Literature (New York, 1931), gives a critical estimate of Ilov/ells' fiction with the author's doctrine of realism as a criterion, but he does not adequately describe this doctrine nor include sufficient works to illustrate the application of his theory to his practice. iii in the treatment of the American scene.

Inasmuoh as Howells* entire "body of fiction is too voluminous to be

included in a study of this kind, representative novels of the various as¬

pects of the American scene have been chosen. In selecting the novels to be studied in the writing of this thesis, the writer was also mind fill of the different periods of the author. Consequently, the following novels were chosen for study* A Chance Acquaintance, Dr. Breen’s Praotioe, A

Hazard of Mew Fortunes, An Imperative Duty, Indian Summer, The Kentons, The

Lady of the Aroostook, A Modern Instance, The Quality of Mercy, The Rise of

Silas Lapham, and A Traveler from Altruria.

The writer is indebted to Dr. Thomas D. Jarrett for his competent

guidance and invaluable assistance which made this thesis possible. She

acknowledges this indebtedness with gratitude. Appreciation is also ex¬

tended to Mrs. G. W. Barksdale, reference librarian of Atlanta University,

for her cooperation in securing books that were not available in the Atlanta

University library. iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE ii

CHAPTER

I. CRITICAL ESTIMATES OF HOWELLS' REALISM 1 Nineteenth Century Criticisms Twentieth Century Criticisms Criteria Used in Evaluations

II. HOWELLS' LITERARY CREED 2 Function of Literature Principle of Truth Principle of Democracy Principle of Individualism Principle of Decency

III. HOWELLS' TREATMENT OF THE AMERICAN SCENE 23 Society and Manners Economic Problems Portrayal of Characters Handling of Plotr

IV. CONCLUSION 45

BIBLIOGRAPHY 49 CHAPTER I

CRITICAL ESTIMATES OF HOWELLS ' REALISM

William Dean Howells contributed his voluminous body of fiction to

American literature during the latter part of the nineteenth century, when the American way of life as well as American letters was undergoing a tran¬ sition, No student of American literature can overlook the contribution made by Howells to the new literary movement known as realism, which took shape during the last three decades of the century. Today he occupies a much less prominent position in American letters than he did during his life-time. Nevertheless, present day criticism of him is as copious as that of his own day.

Without examining a cross section of the criticisms that have been made of Howells' realism, it is impossible to clearly understand the con¬ troversy which has arisen over his position in American literature. There¬

fore, a preliminary study of these estimates is considered for three rea¬ sons. First, it is imperative for objective reflection. By examining all phases of the appraisals of Howells' realism, the danger of adhering to a particular school or group of critics is eliminated. Second, a study of the numerous appraisals of Howells is necessary in order to determine why the criteria used by critics in arriving at these judgments is not ade¬ quate. Third, an analysis of the criticisms of other novelists and critics throws considerable light on and gives a background for a study of the

application of Howells' literary creed to his treatment of the American

scene, which the writer considers in a third chapter.

If Howells' contribution is so highly significant to scholars, how

1 2 have they evaluated it? Is there a wide margin of difference in their evaluations? What criteria have they used in arriving at their conclus¬ ions? These are some of the questions which this chapter purposes to answer.

It should be kept in mind that romanticism was still in vogue at the time Howells was producing his novels. And much of the revolt against him came from the romanticists. James Lane Allen voices the sentiment of many of his fellow romanticists in their opposition to realism as well as to

Howells. Allen notes that

...it is not uninstructive for a writer to attempt to de¬ fine the critical function? it is thus at least that we learn what is characteristically and theoretically, if not prac¬ tically, his own. In the effort of Mr. Howells, if we mistook not, is evidence of a desire to apply scientific method to the material and the laws of the imagination.^

In this statement Mr. Allen attempts to reduce this literary movement to absurdity. He contends that realism is nothing more than the misapplica¬ tion of scientific methods.

Maurice Thompson, who was regarded as an outstanding critic of Howells’ time, likewise upheld the traditional romantic trend. He exclaimed that

"the worshipping of the vulgar, the commonplace and the insignificant is the last stage of vulgarity, hopelessness, and decadence."** Thompson con¬ demns all realists on the basis that they deal too much with the faults of humanity to the exclusion of the imagined noble instances of human self sacrifice.

^Janies Lane Allen, "Caterpillar Critics," The Forum, IV (November, 1887), 341. 2 Herbert Edwards, "The Controversy Over Realism in American Fiction," American Literature, VI (November, 1931), 239. 3Ibid. 3

Although Howells was reckoned as new-fashioned and unworthy to be called a novelist because the reading public and many critics of his day looked upon the novel as being a means of escape from actuality and sor- diness, there were some befrienders of realism. The quotation which fol¬ lows is illustrative:

After all what can realism produce but the downfall of con¬ ventionality? Just as the scientific spirit digs the ground from beneath superstition, so does its fellow worker, realism, tend to prick the bubble of abstract types. Realism is the tool of the democratic spirit, the modern spirit by means of which the truth is elicted, and Mr. Howells' realism is untiring.

As Howells continued to write, romanticists and moralists persisted in their vicious attacks on him. Meanwhile moderation was exemplified, and in many instances the criticism became increasingly fhvorable. Celia

Parker Wooly does not completely defend Howells, but the comment which follows shows that gradually he was being accepted. Mrs. Wooly makes the following observation:

This criticism is often honest, and to a degree intelligent, but much of it is undiscerning, flippant, and coarse. Its source lies in the suspicion and dislike of those principles of realism in art, felt by the average critic of the day, and of which Mr. Howells is the leading exponent in this country.2

Prom the criticisms already set forth it can be concluded that there was a controversy over the virtues of realism, particularly Howells' realism.

When we turn to twentieth century criticism we find more uniformity of opinion. Most of the critics after the turn of the century found Howells' realism old-fashioned. Ten years after his death the following comment was

T. S. Perry, '’William Dean Howells," Century Magazine, I (March, 1882), 683. 2 Quoted by Herbert Edwards in "The Controversy Over Realism in American Fiction." See page 2. 4 made of hims

Not only did he /Howells^ avoid sex in his own novels, but he wanted all others to avoid it too. As late as 1916 he proclaimed himself ’’Victorian in irçy preference for deoency.” He had a paralyzing distaste for anything that offended him personally and he denied all such matters a place in his fiction. Thus by temperamental limitations he was debarred from penetrating below the superficial manners of society, and by environmental deflections was carried still farther from reality.^

Continuing in the same vein is a criticism made by Knight:

For his /Sowellsj/ realism was by no means the kind we think of as derived even in part from French sources. It was well mannered and invariably under control. A fastidious man, Howells avoided in his fiction as in his life all that smacked of vulgarity, of noise, of violence. He was a Westerner, but his humor was as remote from Mark Twain’s as the poles are separate. Howells' realism is rather of the Jane Austen variety, placid in behavior and refined in taste.^

Fred Lewis Pattee, one of the most noted scholars of American literature

of the twentieth century, is also of the opinion that Howells is not a gen¬

uine realist. His comment which follows is illustrative:

The realism of Howells is of the eighteenth-century type rather than the nineteenth. It is classicism, as Henry James's is classicism. His affinity is with Richardson rather than Zola. He was timid and consc¬ ious of his audience. He had approached Boston with too much reverence; the "tradition of the Atlantic" lay heavily upon him during all of his earlier period; the shadow of Lowell was upon his page and he wrote as in his presence; the suggestive words in a review of one of his earlier books by the North Amerioan Review, final voice of New England refinement, compelled him: "He has the incompacity to be common." Thus his early writings had in them nothing of the Western audacity and newness. A realistic reaction from the romantic

^C. Hartley Gratton, "Howells: Ten Years After," American Mercury, XX (May, 1930), 44.

^Grant C. Knight, American Literature and Culture (New York, 1932), p. 372. 5

school of the early nineteenth century was everywhere—on the Continent, in England, in America—changing literary standards; Howells felt it and yielded to it, but he yielded only as Long¬ fellow would have yielded had he been of his generation, or Holmes, or Lowell. He yielded to a modified realism, a timid and refined realism, a realism that would not offend the sensi¬ bilities of Boston, the "Boston,” to quote from A Chance Ac- quaintance, "that would rather perish by fire and sword than to be suspected of vulgarity; a critical, fastidious, reluctant Boston, dissatisfied with the rest of the hemisphere.”!

Pattee attributes the timidness of Howells' realism to the fact that he was too anxious to please the taste of his adopted environment rather than speak as a voice of his own native West which was more typically American. Boston

society, Pattee observes, caused him to exemplify the kind of realism that was in vogue during the eighteenth century and early nineteenth century in¬

stead of fostering the realism that had definitely become a literary move¬

ment in the late nineteenth century.

Among twentieth century critics of Howells there is a group who strong¬

ly maintain that though he was not a genuine or thoroughgoing realist, he was an ardent exponent of realism. Ernest E. Leisy is a member of this

group, and holds Howells high in his esteem as a crusader for the cause of

realistic fiction. He has this to say of him:

His passion for the good sometimes stood in the way of his understanding the truth. But his tirelessness in de¬ nouncing romanticism and in advocating realism was help¬ ful.... By virtue of his independence he was able to take large strides toward a more truthful presentation of life. Yet today his realism seems modified and timid. The lighter ironies of existence describes as well as his beloved Jane Austen; but heart-rending decisions such as people are ob¬ liged to make in real life, he seldom gives.... Only be¬ cause of his reticence, Howells missed the greatness of those who draw the grand passions.*

■^Fred Lewis Pattee, American Literature Since 1870 (Hew York, 1915), p. 212. 2 Ernest E. Leisy, American Literature (New York, 1929), p. 193. 6

Similarly, Howells is considered as an exponent of realism by a twentieth century critic. Manly, for example, observes that:

There is no question as to the influence of Howells upon the men of his own generation. In the earlier part of our period, Howells' example both in criticism and in creative work assisted considerably in making realism the dominant literary mode. If the publication of Dreiser's Sister Carrie in 1900 indicates the emergence of a more daring realism, its suppression suggests that the restrained and decent realism of Howells was still a standard of taste.1

Because of his great influence upon writers, Manly supports the contention that Howells contributed greatly to the growth of realism. He also main¬ tains that realism as exemplified in Howells' fiction was looked upon as a

standard.

Oscar Yv'. Firkins, who has made one of the best critical studies of

Howells, upholds him as an exponent of realism. Firkins makes this obser¬ vation:

His fortunes in his ov/n day have by no means equalled his deserts; but to feel this strongly is not to be over confi¬ dent that the future will side with the deserts against the fortunes.... I feel much more hopeful of an ampler and juster recognition of the soundness of his critical achievement. About the novels two things may be confidently averred: they will be perennially valuable to scholarship, and they will never be valuable to the Philistine middle class human¬ ity; the point of interesting doubt is whether they will re¬ tain a value for culture undefiled with scholarship.

Firkins is one of the few critics who look upon Howells as a profound ex¬

ponent of this literary vogue, realism, which came into its own after the

Civil War, and which paved the way for present day naturalism. Some of

Howells' most hostile critics have been unable to deny this.

^John M. Manly and Edith Rickert, Contemporary American Literature (New York, 1929), p. 4. 20scar W. Firkins, William Dean Howells (Cambridge, 1924), pp. 332- 333 7

In the controversy over Howells' works, occasionally a scholar finds his realism genuine. The comment of Arthur H. Quinn, for example, is in contrast to some of the appraisals previously set forth. He asserts that:

It was not satire alone, therefore, that secured Howells his audience. It was his really deed insight into certain phases of human character, his careful study of human emo¬ tions, of human purposes and motives, his kindly tolerant attitude toward mankind, the probability of his events and characters, and the art with which his plot, slight as it often is, works out logically and inevitably to the destined end. He never made use of the easy "God out of the car," he even avoided the use of striking situations which he might have employed, he resolutely determined to represent the human comedy as it is; and as a result his novels form a contribution to our literature and to the study of our nat¬ ional life which is difficult to over estimate.*

Whenever an evaluation of ary sort is made, there must be some yard¬ stick of measurement or a basis for a logical final judgment. The evalua¬ tion of Howells' realism is no exception. What, then, are some of the criteria for the appraisals set forth in this study? First, it is appar¬ ent that most scholars compare the realism exemplified in Howells’ fic¬ tion with the twentieth century concept of realism. Delmar Gross Cooke vividly points out this fact:

The fashion of poking fun at Howells' niceness and insist¬ ing upon the limitations represented by his reverence for "de¬ cent people" will disappear before a wider and deeper ac¬ quaintance with his works, in which it must be found that he has reaped a unique and substantial reward for his circumspec¬ tion. Objections are prevalently based on the assumption that there is such a thing as a realism that treat a given subject without leaving lucunae—the realism, let us say, that was to give us the "great American novel" we used to hear so much about

parison.

Likewise Vernon L. Parrington advances this same idea:

^Arthur H. Quinn, Americanr 1 Fiction (New York, 1936), p. 276. ■ Delmar Gross Cooke, William Dean Howells (New York, 1922), p. 79. 8

The current school of realism is inclined to deal harshly with Howells. His quiet reticences, his obtrusive morality, his genial optimism, his dislike of looking ugly fkcts in the face, are too old-fashioned today to please the professional purveyors of our current disgusts. It was not his fault that the ways of one generation are not those of another, and it is well to remember that if his realism seems wanting to a generation bred up on Dreiser, it seemed a debasement of the fine art of literature to a genera¬ tion bred up on Thomas Bailey Aldrich. Realism like dress changes its modes.

Hot all twentieth century critics, however, use the modern conoept of realism and present day conditions as criteria in their critical estimates.

An example of this is found in Grant C. Knight’s contention that Howells was a failure in his attempt to treat the life of his day in a realistic manner. His contention is maintained by posing two questions:

Was Howells, after all, a realist? Did not the very things that he shunned constitute so large a part of the actual pheno¬ mena of social behavior that he had no business to ignore them, and did not his turning his back upon them put him in the ranks of the romanticists? Surely there must have been, even in the polite circles that moved in and near Boston, more flow of red blood, more excitement, more of the ugly than he allowed himself to reproduce.2

Knight uses as his standard the American scene of the author’s own day and not necessarily present day conditions. He seems to argue that human nature, being what it is, has certain traits which are fundamental and are found to exist in all levels of society and at all times. He further argues that life is made up of the ugly as well as the beautiful, and should be like¬ wise treated in literature.

Howells is often condemned on the basis that his realism was more re¬ gional—that is, given to a treatment of locality rather than the nation

"hf. L. Parrington, The Beginnings of Critical Realism in America, Vol. Ill (Hew York, 1930), pp. 241-42. 20p. cit., p. 373. 9 as a whole. It is frequently said of him that he paid too much attention to the environment in which he found himself, with no eyes focused on the

American soene and its greatest counterpart—the West. For an illustration of this idea, let us again turn to Mr. Parrington who notes thats

If he failed to depict it in all his sprawling verocity, if much of his crude robustness never got into his pages, the lack was due to no self-imposed alienation but to the temperament of the artist and the refined discretion of his environment.*

Similarly, we cannot overlook a comment made in this regard by C. Hartley

Gratton who feels that;

When he (Howells) settled in Boston he was thoroughly pre¬ pared to accept the traditional culture of that exhausted com¬ munity. In spite of the fact that he came from the frontier and was theoretically a barbarian his whole mental set was alien to the iconoclasm which would have led him to perceive the limita¬ tions of his new environment. Because he was thoroughly de¬ flected from the frontier he failed to see that the only real vitality in America was in the region from which he had come. While the drive of American society was Westward, he was re¬ treating to the East, and even to Boston, which was more a back¬ water than say Hew York. Thus he left a christening to attend a funeral.^

And a final appraisal in which the critic feels that the author's lack of

success is a result of his regional limitations is evidenced in the follow¬

ing excerpt from American Humor by Constance Rourke. She believes that;

Howells was the only other measurable American writer of this time to employ the novelistic form; the concerns of Howells were largely regional; he was engaged by small por¬ tions of the American scene and of the American character; he never fused them into an unmistakable and moving whole.®

Having set forth a cross section of the critical estimates of William

Dean Howells, it is easy to get a retrospective view of the varied positions

Op. oit., p. 24. %p. cit., p. 43.

Constance Rourke, American Humor (Hew York, 1931), p. 263. 10 relegated to him by critics. It has been revealed that there are two pri¬ mary criticisms directed toward Howells' realism: first, it is genteel or tepidj and second, it embodies vulgarity and indecency. Rarely does a critic see his realism as thoroughgoing. The former criticism is expressed pri¬ marily by twentieth century critics, the latter by nineteenth century critics.

There is greater controversy among nineteenth century critics. Some held that his realism was too -vulgar and coarse and had no right to be given a place in literature. Others of his contemporaries held him in esteem and praised him for attempting to portray life as it was lived.

There is not a wide margin of difference in the evaluations made by twentieth century scholars. In only one instance 7/as a favorable criticism made as compared to several estimates in which Howells’ realism was labeled as tepid or genteel. There is also uniformity of opinion that Hov/ells was an exponent of realism in American literature. Despite this uniformity, some have taken a more objective attitude. They maintain that the artist's strong points have been minimized while his weaker ones ha7e been emphasized.

Three criteria have been used by critics in arriving at these judgments.

First, the realism under consideration has been compared with present day realism. The modern concept of realism attributed to Howells is mild and modest. Second, his realism has been placed along side the American scene

of his day. Third, the nation as a whole rather than the provinces treated has been used as a yardstick for determining the extent of his realism. CHAPTER II

HOWELLS * LITERARY CREED

From the critical estimates given in the previous chapter, we saw that

Howells* critics did not escape the danger of judging his works too exclusive¬ ly without reference to the author's intention. If all of his critics could have arrived at a common conception of the basic tenets of realism, much of

the controversy over his realism would not confront us. Since this is im¬

possible, in that no two critics seem to arrive at an identical conception,

it seems feasible to attempt to ascertain Howells' literary creed because of

the illumination it throws upon his works, which will be studied in some de¬

tail in the chapter that follows. Therefore, the present chapter purports to

deal with the theory underlying the authors' fiction, thus establishing more

objective criteria for an appraisal.

Fortunately Howells' was a critic as well as a novelist. His voluminous

body of criticism contains his literary theory. This rare combination of

critic and creator is significant in that the creator has given us his own

criteria for measuring his achievement. Consequently, the important docu¬

ments which contain most of the data used here to ascertain Howells* liter¬

ary creed are found in his major critical studies, My Literary Passions,

Literature and Life, the "Editor's Study" in Harper's Magazine (1886-1892),

and Criticisms and Fiction.

In looking through his works for some single or precise expression of

his literary theory, it is difficult to settle upon any one statement that

synthesizes all the principles of Howells* realism. Since it is an esta¬

blished fact that literature end life are very closely related, it might be

11 12 well to begin with the novelist’s point of view on this relationship. Ho¬ wells expresses this relationship of life and literature in the following manner:

For my own part, If I am to identify myself with the writer who is here on his defense, I have never been able to see much difference between what seemed to me Literature and what seemed to me Life. If I did not find life in what professed to be literature I disabled its profession, and possibly from this habit, now in¬ veterate with me, I am never quite sure of life unless I find lit¬ erature in it.

For Howells, then, literature is a mirror in which life is reflected. Wher¬ ever there is life, literature inevitably results. Unless literature depicts life, it has no pretension to be called literature. In other words, litera¬ ture should be a record of life as it is lived.

The comment which he makes of H. H. Boyensen's novel, The Mammon of Un¬ righteousness, further points out the relationship of life and literature.

Here he believes that

.... The Mammon of Unrighteousness may stand for an Ameri¬ can novel of the first rank; and it is just to both sides of the national character which is so deep and sharp a line of cleavage divides that, looking at one, you are always inclined to deny that there is any other. No people ever presented as we do the beauty of the ideal and the ugliness of the material; but there are very few observers who see us in both. We ere founded, cast, shaped in the ideal, yet most of our users are frankly and brutally material.... It (Boyesen’s novel) is from the outset bodily realistic; and it is at the same time poetical, as realism alone can be, since realism alone has courage to look life squarely in the face and try to report its divinely imagined lineaments. If it cannot do this perfectly, that is because all art is im¬ perfect; but the rudest endeavor at verity is better than the most finished pretence that there is something better than verity.2

^W. D. Howells, Literature and Life (New York, 1902), p. iii. 2Harpers Monthly, "Editor’s Study," IXXXIII (July, 1891), 317. 13

Consequently, in addition to the idea that literature should picture life, here we find a plea for truthfulness in the portrayal of life. If only one

side of life is portrayed, literature is unfair to life in its representation

of it. The most feeble attempt to represent life in its entirety is better

than an extraordinary attempt to represent the ideal. If literature repre¬

sents life, it is bound to be a criticism of life; therefore, literature must

moralize. "Mortality penetrates everything,"1 says Howells. And a truthful

and whole representation of life is necessary for even a subtle moral.

This idea that literature should be all inclusive in its expression of

life is the basic foundation of Howells literary creed. The first distinct

phase of his doctrine is that of truth. In setting forth his criteria for

the appraisal of fiction, he implies that truth should be the primary criter¬

ion.

I confess that I do not care to judge any work of the imagina¬ tion without first of all applying this test to it. We must ask ourselves before we ask anything else, is it true?—true to the motives, the impulses, the principles that shape the lives of ac¬ tual men and women? This truth which necessarily includes the highest morality and the highest artistry—this truth given, the book cannot be wicked and cannot be weak; and without it all graces of style and feats of invention and cunning of construction are so many superfluities of naughtiness.

With the truth as a criterion, he finds that Jane Austen's works meas¬

ure up to his standard, he says of her:

She was great and they (her novels) were beautiful, she and they were honest, and dealt with nature nearly a hundred years ago as realism deals with it today. Kealism is nothing more and nothing less than the truthful treatment of material, and Jane Austen was the first and the last of the English novelists to treat material with entire truthfulness.®

3-W. D. Howells, Criticism and Fiction (New York, 1891), p. 83. 2Ibid.. pp. 99-100. 3Ibid., p. 73. 14

Because Howells looks upon Jane Austen's works as being faithful in upholding

through truth the relationship of literature and life, he rates her as the

best English novelist. Again he contends that the truth in fiction should be

set up as a goal because truthfulness in literature makes it enduring and out¬

standing regardless of the inconstancy of moods and tastes. He offers the

comment which follows in support of this idea:

That is to say as I understand, moods and taste and fashions change; people fancy now this and now that, but what is unpre¬ tentious and what is true is always beautiful and good, and noth¬ ing else is so.^

Thus, this principle of Howells' doctrine may be expressed in the words of

Keats: "Beauty is truth, truth beauty."

In discussing Howells' literary theory, the democratic and humanitarian

spirit is not to be dismissed lightly. He constantly aims at an essentially

democratic revaluation of artistic materials and experiences. Literature, like

all the arts, is to be identified in aim with all other civilizing forces such

as science and democracy. The concluding idea advanced in one of his critical works is illustrative of this fact:

Men are more like than unlike one another, let us make them know one another better, that they may be all humbled and streng¬ thened with a sense of their fraternity. Neither arts nor letters, nor sciences, except as they somehow, clearly or obscurely, tend to make the race better or kinder, are to be regarded as serious in¬ terests; they are all lower than the rudest craft that feed and house and clothe, for except as they do this office they are idle; and they cannot do this except from and through the truth.

Turning to more of Howells’ criticism for further elaboration of this

idea, we find him proclaiming that Dickens, one of the great English novelists

1Ibid., p. 3. 2 Ibid., p. 188. 15 of the nineteenth century, is purely democratic in his effect. In Dickens he finds the tendency to make all men equal as far as the basic human traits are concerned. The favorable appraisal he makes of him substantiates this point:

The base of his work is the whole breadth and depth of hu¬ manity itself.... I do not know that in the whole range of his works he once suffers us to feel our superiority to a fellow creature through any social accident, or except for some moral cause. Equality and fraternity, these are the ideals which once moved the world, and then fell into despite and mockery, as unrealities; but now they assert themselves in our hearts once more.

In that Dickens treats humanity as a whole instead of the inferior and superior parts, Howells uses him as an example of a democratic author. Howells is far reaching in his disdain of the aristocratic spirit in literature. In treating

American life, literature should remain faithful to the American practice and should be acceptable to the American people and contribute to their life. Thus he establishes a point from which he can attack romanticists. He dislikes a spirit that supresses when it does not sentimentalize. He contends that no¬ bility and heroism in fiction, for the most part, have no relation to the faith and feeling of the best among us, and the grandeur that is centered around the ideal in imagination at the expense of our common grandeur is futile. He offers the comment below in support of this idea.

Such beauty and such grandeur as we have is common beauty, common grandeur in which the quality of solidarity so prevails that neither distinguishes itself to disadvantage of anything else. It seems to me that the conditions invite the artist to the study and appreciation of the common, and to the portrayal in every art of these finer and higher aspects which unite rather gever humanity, if he would thrive in our new order of things.

^W. D. Howells, My Literary Passions (New York, 1895), pp. 96-97. o Criticism and Fiction, p. 139. 16

If the ideal and noble exist at all, they are not common enough to occupy a prominent place in fiction; and if they are catered to, much is lost that would contribute to the majority of the people. If literature is of the peo¬ ple, it should be for the people. It is this point of view that led Howells to say:

Art is not produced for artist, or even for connoisseurs, it is produced for the general, who can never view it otherwise than morally, personally, partially, from their associations and pre¬ occupations. Whether the effect with the general is what the artist works for or not, he does not succeed without. Their brute liking or misliking is the final test, it is universal suffrage that elects, after all.l

One of the tenets of Howells* realism that is most pronounced is that of the individual spirit of the writer. He believes that the author should be faithful first of all to himself; then there is no doubt that he will be faith¬ ful to the function of literature. Literature is the representation of human nature, and human nature is shared by and known to us all. And the only way for a writer to express human nature is to be faithful to his knowledge and feelings toward it. This is the primary message given below:

If I were authorized to address any word directly to our novelists, I should say, do not trouble about standards or ideals: but try to be faithful and natural: remember there is no greatness, no beauty, which does not come from truth to your own knowledge of things: and keep on working, even if your work is not long remembered.

Here Howells goes so far as to advise that the only thing for the novelist to concern himself about is fidelty to his own knowledge and perception of human nature, even at the expense of fame and posterity. However, his mes¬ sage to critics that "each new author be considered, not in his proportion

^Literature and Life, p. 266. Criticism and Fiction, p. 145. 17 to any other author or artist, but in his relation to human nature""*" suggests a means that would encourage writers not to strive to conform to standards or ideals.

For support of this principal of individualism he turns to his Spanish friend, Valdes, and uses this declaration of his Spanish counterparts

"in like manner if the realistic tide that now bears us own there are some spirits who feel in another way, in the romantic way, or the classic way, they would not falsify her in expressing her so. Only those falsify her who without feeling classic wise or romantic, wearisomely reproducing the models of former ages; and equally those who without sharing the sentiment of realism, which now prevails, forces themselves to be realists merely to follow the fashion."^

Here the essence of Valdes' plea is that as a writer feels so should he write without adhering to models or fashions. No writer should force himself to follow a creed which he does not believe in. And like his friend, Howells strongly advocates the writer's manifesting his reaction toward the material that he treats.

It is on the same basis that Howells discovers Zola's weakness, observ¬ ing that

Zola embodied his ideal inadequately, as every man who embodies an ideal must. His realism was his creed, which he tried to make his deed; but before his fight was ended, and almost before he began to forbade it as a losing fight, he began to feel and to say that he was too much a roman¬ ticist by birth and tradition, to exemplify realism in his work.... He was that pathetic paradox, a prophet who can¬ not practioe what he preaches, who cannot build his doc¬ trine into the edifice of a living faith.®

1 - Ibid., p. 8. 2 Ibid., p. 63. Quoted by Howells from Senor Valdes.

3W. D. Howells, "Emile Zola" The Nation CXXXV, 588. 18

Therefore, by being unfaithful to his creed and embodying an ideal, Howells believes, Zola fell short of true greatness. Had he been able to draw a line between artificiality and naturalness, and step over to the side of the natur¬ al, his contribution to literature would have been greater. Since he did not, he failed to express himself individualistically.

The principle of decency is the fourth aspect of Howells literary creed.

At first it may seem inconsistent with the other aspects of his creed that have been presented in this study. It might even seem paradoxical to assert that the truth can corrupt. Yet, Howells asks if there is inconsistency in a realist objecting to books that portray bestiality "under a glamour of some¬ thing spiritual and beautiful and sublime."1 This phase of decency in Howells* theory is an issue that caused much of the controversy over his realism and led to hostile criticism. His insistence on decency also led to the labeling of his realism as "tepid," "genteel," and "Victorian."

Howells insists upon diction that is not offensive and indecent in ex¬ pressing the truth. He has no place in his fiction for words that might sug¬ gest vulgarity, and he readily confesses his abhorence of certain words:

At the same time I confess that I have a prejudice against certain words that I cannot overcome; the sight of some offends me, the sound of others, and rather than use one of these de¬ tested vocables, even when I conceive that it would convey my exact meaning, I would cast about long for some other.®

Furthermore, he also agrees with those who insist that extreme passion be omitted from literature because it involves indecency, and states his rea¬ son for sharing their belief.

1 Criticisms and Fiction, p. 61. 2 My Literary Passion, p. 112. 19

I justify them in this view not only because I hate what is cheap and meretricious, and hold in peculiar loathing the cant of the critics who require "passion" as something in itself ad¬ mirable and desirable in a novel, but because I prize fidelity in the historian of feeling and character. Most of the critics who demand "passion" would seem to have no conception of any passion but one.1

Howells maintains that if the Anglo-Saxon novel could speak for itself it would cry out against the guilty intrigue, illicit love affairs, and ex¬ treme flirtations. These elements, he believes, are more of the exception in life rather than the rule. These are permissible only in a case where the scheme of the story necessarily involved them, and it is bad taste to 2 insert them for the sake of sensation. It is noteworthy, then, that his contention is not that these unwholesome attributes do not exist beneath the surface of society, but they are not characteristic of society.

He does not hesitate to condemn the classics for indecency any more than the modern writers whose sincerity he praises. He goes so far as to suggest expurgated editions of the former. In this regard he makes this observation;

I hope the time will come when the beast-man will be so far subdued and tamed in us that the memory of him in literature shall be left to perish...that the pedant pride which now per¬ petuates it as an essential part of those poets shall no longer have its way. At the end of the ends such things do defile, they do corrupt...and I do not see why they should not be dropped from literature, as they were long ago dropped from the talk of decent people.3

The restraint of the New England society which Howells adopted was definitely a part of him, and it often shows up in his literary creed. In

^Criticisms and Fiction, p. 156.

2Ibid.. p. 149. 3 My Literary Passions, p. 54. 20 addition to this, he was by temperament a ’’gentleman" in the truest sense of the word. He prefers a literature that does not offend the ladies nor corrupt the young. For this reason he could not wholly accept Pépita

Xinevez by Juan Valera, a Spanish realist. In criticizing this work, he notes that:

It is not a book that I could commend without reserve to the reading of young people, but after frankly confessing this I must say that it is, even by our own standards a far more blameless book than half the fiction I know...

He refers to Zola's books as not "immoral," but "indecent through the facts that they nakedly represent."2 y@t Zola’s books are "infinitely more moral than the books of any French novelist." For similar reasons he also ob¬ jects to Chaucer, declaring that he is

Not ready to say that the harm from it is positive, but you do get smeared with it, and the filthy thought lives with the filthy rhyme in the ear, even vfcen it does not corrupt the heart or make it seem a light thing for the reader’s tongue and pen to sin in kind.4

And it is significant that the above quotation is typical of Howells’ pro¬ test against anything presented in such a manner as to be offensive to "mixed company" and young readers.

A close study of Howells’ criticism reveals that he believes that the facts of life can be presented in a decent manner instead of a sensational manner. It is not the desire of the realists to "deal with nakedness as painters and sculptors freely do in their worship of beauty; or with certain

1Ibid., p. 243. 2 Ibid., p. 246. 3 Ibid.

4Ibld.. p. 110. 21 facts of life, as the stage does, in the service of sensation.** Many true realists have achieved realism, and yet they have not manifested indecency.

The explanation offered by Howells is that

They have kept a correct proportion, knowing perfectly well that unless the novel is to be a map, with everything scrupulous¬ ly laid down on it, a faithful record of life in far the greater extent could be made to the exclusion of guilty love and all its circumstances and consequences.2

If there were any single expression of Howells* literary creed, the fore¬ going would probably be it. But, like the others, it is not inclusive of

all four of the main tenets of his literary creed.

We have seen that Howells’ literary creed embodies four tenets which

are based upon an underlying principle or foundation. This basic principle

is that the function of literature is to represent life in its entirety.

Given this, the next step is to aim for a truthful representation. Since

literature is a representation of life, the doctrine of equality should be

adhered to in this representation; otherwise the vhole of American society

will not be represented. The writer should turn his eyes away from the

past or other writers, and focus them within. His aim is to represent what

he has perceived and the way he feels toward it. Finally, he must keep in

mind the reader. Reserve and limitation are to be exercised in order not

to offend or corrupt the reader. This implies decency in treatment for the

sake of the fair sex and the young mind.

If, as the result of the material presented in this chapter, a summar¬

izing statement of Howells’ literary theory can be made, it is this: The

^Criticisms and Fiction, p. 153.

2Ibid., p. 156. function of literature, is to portray decently and truthfully the equality of experiences shared by American society. CHAPTER III

HOWELIS* TREATMENT OF THE AMERICAN SCENE

Before a study is made of Howells* application of the criteria which he set forth in his literary criticism to the American scene which he treated, it is expedient to look briefly at that scene. The term "Glided Age" is often applied to the era between the close of the Civil War and beginning of the twentieth century. During this epoch everything in the social and business life of America was colored by gold. Money was more or less the sole criterion by which everything was judged. Consequently, the whole nation was engaged in a mad, vulgar struggle for the possession of dollars.

Science, technology, invention, in short, the Industrial Revolution and the subsequent development of manufacturing and its allied interests, commerce and finance, tended to displace the romantic spirit. Industry represented monetary profit and material progress. This age of materialism necessitated the rule of common sense and expediency, all of which opposes the romantic spirit.^"

As has been suggested, this new change brought about many problems as well as new ideas. The growth of cities meant the appearance of many social problems—housing, public health, police protection, and labor problems. In¬ creasing strife between capital and labor was more pronounced than ever be¬ fore. Howells’ America represented a period of readjustment, or better still, a transition.

It is often maintained that the realistic writer who describes contem¬ porary life must of necessity become a satirist, and that Howells, as is true

^Russell Blankenship, American Literature (New York, 1S31), pp. 391-92.

23 24 of all satirists, had his field provided for him. If these statements are true, and they appear to be, one might logically ask: How well does Howells treat this field in his fiction? Does he adhere wholly to his literary creed in satirizing or depicting the American scene? These two questions underlie the writer’s purpose in this chapter.

In Howells' view of the American scene, two points of interest arrested his attention, the societies of New York and Boston, He was a keen observer of the manners of these two societies, and these observations are faithfully recorded in his fiction. It is for this reason that his novels are often re¬ ferred to as "novels of manners." In this limited view of society Howells was cognizant of four distinct aspects of society, namely: social levels,

domestic life, crime, and ethics. These four elements are given prominence

in his treatment of American life.

In dealing with social levels certain limitations occur which are not harmonious with the author’s literary creed. Howells' democratic and humani¬

tarian theory of literature not only permits a wide range in the choice of

social classes, but also in the portrayal of American life in its general

social contrast. He chose for his keenest observations the class which rose

into prominence after the Civil War by amassing large fortunes and the tra¬

ditional aristocracy. The comfortably established proletariat is treated

less frequently, and very rarely are the poorer classes dealt with. This

practice is not in harmony with the doctrine of realism which Howells ex¬

pounded in that he conceded that "the whole breadth and depth of humanity

itself" should be presented. One logically asks, then, was not the poor

working class a vital part of humanity?

A cultivated, intellectualized, and privileged society constitute his 25 ideal of American society. To this class the proletarist had to devote it¬ self to the task of relating and adjusting as best it could. Although many aspects of society are brought to the front, many of the more sordid ones are relegated to the position of existing behind the scene. The Coreys in

The Rise of Silas Lapham, the Hallecks in A Modern Instance, and the Hilarys in The Quality of Mercy illustrate the patrician Boston caste; the Marches in A Hazard of New Fortunes are representative of the educated but not so wealthy class; the Dryfooses in A Hazard of New Fortunes and the Laphams in The Rise of Silas Lapham, are shining examples of the "nouveau riche."

But an omission of a vivid presentation of the lower classes and their un¬ fortunate plight is obvious to the reader of Howells' fiction. Oocassionally the lower classes have a spokesman such as the German socialist, Lindau, in

A Hazard of New Fortunes; but this omission causes a lacuna in the picture of society in its entirety.

A Hazard of Hew Fortimes may well represent New York society. A Modern

Instance vividly depicts the mannerisms of two social classes and Boston life in general. The Kentons shows us the significance of the metropolis in How¬ ells' fiction, though some of his characters wander far from it. But New

York and Boston are not the only habitats of the American populace. There are constituents of the human race other than these two classes to which

Howells devotes most of his efforts. Granted that this is true, Howells

falls short of his goal to "make men know one another better," and to in¬ clude the "whole breadth and depth of humanity." The scant treatment of the Negro in An Imperative Duty does not by any means give a representative picture of the struggling Negro during the reconstruction period. Nowhere in Howells' fiction does he represent the economic and social problems of 26 this minority group which was definitely an intergral part of American life.

All of these limitations show Howells' failure to adhere to that tenet of 1 his theory which advocates a whole representation of humanity.

In the treatment of the aristocracy and the "nouveau riche” two elements are prevalent—sympathy and satire. The social snobbery existing among the aristocracy in an effort to keep their circle free of socially inferior in¬ vaders seems to evoke sympathy from the author. The Coreys in The Rise of

Silas Lapham are an illustration of his sympathetic attitude. The sym¬ pathetic treatment of this Boston family when it finds itself under obliga¬ tions for help fi*om their social inferiors, the Laphams, and the consterna¬ tion which confronts the Coreys when it is discovered that Tom Corey, the

only son of this prominent family, is in love with one of the Lapham daugh¬ ters is accomplished in such a way as to reveal the author's affection for 2 this social level. Howells' sympathetic portrayal causes the reader to

feel sorry for these people who allow the most trivial incidents to become monstrosities. On the other hand, the reader is made to laugh at what has been termed the ’’shoddy" aristocracy—those socially ambitious persons whose

only asset is wealth. The false culture which this group is forever assum¬

ing is rather amusing. The Fulkersons, for example, are quite typical of

this class. The comment which the author makes about Mrs. Fulkerson's newly

acquired eye glasses is indicative of this sort of thing, "it was agreed

in the family, Howells notes, "that she looks distinguished in them, or any

rate cultivated. And the general attitude of the Brahminical class, which

^See Supra, Chapter II, p. 15. ^The Rise of Silas Lapham (Boston, 1884), pp. 222-241. 3 A Hazard of New Fortunes (New York, 1889), I, 14. 27 was held in high regard by Howells, is exemplified in The Quality of Mercy by the statement of a character who is a member of this class.

"You know it wouldn't do at all. It isn't a question of his poverty; your father has money enough: it's a question of his social equality, and of all those little nothings that make up the whole of happiness in marriage. He would be different enough, being merely a man born and reared in as different a world from yours as if it were another planet—I want you to think over all the girls you know—and see how many of them have married out of their own set, their own circle--we might also say, their own fhmily. There isn't one!"

In the general treatment of social levels Howells very closely follows his belief that the aristocratic spirit and the democratic and humanitarian spirit cannot be found at the same time in literature. His contention that nobility and heroism in fiction have no relation to the faith and feeling of the best among us is consonant with his practice. He does not make the mistake of oatering to the ideal and noble at the expense of losing much that is of great concern to the majority of the people# Although he is more tolerant with and sympathetic toward the aristocracy than toward the "nouveau riche," there are no more heroes and heroines from the for¬ mer group than the latter. Equally as much attention is given to Silas

Lapham and Marcia Hubbard as to other characters. Northwiok, the hero in The Quality of Mercy, is a criminal.

From the foregoing discussion it seems that one fallacy in Howells' application of his creed is the limited treatment of an all important class

of society. There is an established relation of realism to democracy. The plain man is not inferior to the highly intellectualized or wealthy man,

^The Quality of Mercy (New York, 1891), p. 385. 28 and for the sake of realism, his portrayal must be equal. This fallacy is further magnified by the fact that the class which he slighted com¬ prised the majority of the American populace.

The moral seriousness of Hov/ells forms a basis for his treatment of domestic life. In his novels the institution of marriage is the nuoleus of family life. The marital relations of the Kentons, the Marches, the

Hubbards, and many others are all important to the moral which the author is pointing out. In novels like The Kentons, A Modern Instance, and In¬ dian Summer, marriage seems to be a secondary theme. In each case the affairs of husband and wife are intergrated into the general scheme of things. With the exception of A Modern Instance, there is a perfectly harmonious marital relationship in each of the above novels. This ap¬ pears to be the result of Howells’ attempt to show the ethics of marriage.

Certain things are unethical or unbecoming to married people, and he has his characters avoid these. For example, it is the wife's duty to always remain faithful to her husband, as is the case in the forementioned novels.

In A Modern Instance his only divorce occurs and is used for the purpose of

conveying an ethical message in that he has a chance to assert that failure to exercise ethics or moral standards may result in disaster or unhappiness

in family relations. In this instance divorce is the disaster.

Marriage to Howells is a sacred, and at the same time, terrible thing.

In Silas Lapham, for example, he describes the anguishes and hardships whioh it can undergo and yet in the end remain as the single divine in¬

stitution.^- With the exception of one case, Marcia and Bartley in

^This idea runs throughout the novel. See page 506 for a specif!o passage in which this attitude is found. 29

A Modern Instance, the antagonizing forces smooth themselves out and leave the marriage unharmed. This is true in the cases of the Laphams, the Ken¬ tons, the Marches} and as a matter of fact, none of the marriages in the novels treated in this study encounter any serious difficulty other than in the one in which the divorce occurs. It is in this case that the au¬ thor departs from fidelity to the truth in his rallying to the cause of decency. In Howells' opinion, to give a realistic account of a typical inharmonious marriage would "offend the ladies and corrupt the young."

The only grounds on which Howells can be spared for his unrealistic treat¬ ment of the Bartley-Marcia marriage and the Ben Halleck-Marcia love affair in A Modern Instance is his desire to remain loyal to his principle of decency. He constantly shies away fhom the love passion which would or¬ dinarily exist in an affair like that of Halleok and Maroia.

There is a mutuality and devotion among the husbands and wives in

Howells' fiction which is remarkable. Mrs. March and Mrs. Kenton are ideal in their loyalty and devotion; yet there is a tendency for them to be domineering. Howells' families are too matriarchal for a realis¬ tic representation of the practices of his time. However, the greatest departure from the American practice is in the presentation of the re¬ lationship between parents and children. In support of this assertion reference may be made to the Kentons, one of the most prominent famil¬

ies in his fiction. The Kentons show American parents as weaklings be¬

fore their children. Their lack of ability to chastize their children

is absurd. The idea is given that American parenthood stands helpless

and afraid. Lottie, a daughter, exercises too much authority over other

members of the family; and Ellen, her sister, causes too much concern 30 on the pert of the parents.

Howells' realism permits him to shy away from the truth if it involves bestiality "under a glamour of something spiritual and beautiful and sub¬ lime. * This is perhaps the most plausible explanation of the fact that The

Quality of Mercy is the only novel, among forty fictional works, that deals with crime as such. JSven here the "more smiling aspects" are dealt with.

More attention is devoted to the criminal rather than the crime as a great social menace. When the books opens, the crime has already been committed, thus relieving the author of the task of describing its commission.

As far as can be determined Howells* sole purpose is to adhere to the humanitarian tenet of his creed. Here, he aims to make men know one another better and through such knowledge make the human race kinder. He accomplishes this by two means: first, by showing that condemnation by society cannot ach¬

ieve repentance nor curb crime, for such results are brought about inward pressure; secondly, society is primarily responsible for crime.

Northwick, the criminal hero in The Quality of Mercy, is perturbed by his conscience and the welfare of his daughters; and although safe from the

reach of the law, he is forced to return home. Finally he repents and pays

for his defraudation morally if not materially. Northwick is a man with the

highest morality integrity, but because he finds himself in an environment

where dishonesty and greed for money exist, he indulges too. The trouble with

Northwick is that he succumbs to his environment. Says Putney of him:

"He was a mere creature of circumstance—like the rest of us! His environment made him rich, and his environment made him a rogue. Sometimes I think there was nothing to Northwick, except what happened to him. He's a puzzle.

1The Quality of Mercy,p. 474. 31

It is unmistakably clear that Howells’ message is that the social body is evil. The individual constituents of society have failed to do their duty toward themselves and society. Putney’s speech makes the reader conscious of such. It is in this way that he succeeds in making men know one another bet¬ ter and, as a result, have sympathy for all mankind.

Just as Howells has been regarded as a novelist of manners, he may easily be considered a novelist of morals or ethics. It is an arbitrary process in selecting a group of his fictional works and thinking in terms of their con¬ tribution to ethics. The totality of his fictional works embody an ethical message of some kind in one way or another. We find his characters often dictated to by the voice of duty or grappling with a perturbed conscience.

There is almost always the question of what is right and what is wrong. In other words, the conscience is often an antagonist of the would be actions of the characters. One need only examine The Rise of Silas Lapham for examples of Howells’ intense moral consciousness. The Lapham family is composed of members who possess scruples. Lapham himself is endowed with an honest heart.

The two Lapham daughters, despite their initial misunderstanding of the love

interest of Tom Corey, show sisterly love and high moral principles. Basil

March, the journalist in A Hazard of New Fortunes, displays moral integrity

in his firm stand against the unscrupulous practices commonly found in the

field of journalism. His conscience does not permit him to resort to any-

thing in order to achieve success in his magazine venture.

Despite the generality of the author's ethical purpose throughout his

fiction, an attempt is made here to relegate it to his treatment of society

or social problems and at the same time demonstrate a cognizance of the fact

that ethics is not solely confined to the area of social problems.

It is noteworthy that the treatment of ethics under the forementioned 32 heading is consonant with Howells* doctrine of social equality and spirit of humanitarianism. The evils of society and the burdens of humanity were of great concern to him. He makes no pretensions of offering a cure for the ills of society, but rather shows the relation of man to himself and society and how, by following ethical convictions, the world would be a better place in which to live. The one moral which underlies his whole body of fictional works is that man as a member of society has certain moral obligations to himself and his fellowmen.

Three novels, A Modern Instance, An Imperative Duty, and The Rise of

Silas Lapham, exemplify Howells’ preoccupation with ethics. In the first one

Ben Halleck grapples with the question of whether he should marry Marcia, the ex-wife of Bartley Hubbard. He had loved her at a distance before she ob¬ tained a divorce. After the divorce has been granted the question uppermost in Halleck*s mind is whether it is considered ethical by society for a man of his status to marry a divorce. An Imperative Duty presents us with two characters, Mrs. Meredith and Rhoda Algate, who are deeply perplexed about their moral duties. Mrs. Meredith does not know whether Rhoda, her niece, should be informed of her Negro ancestry or not. She cannot convince her¬ self that it is right for this information to be witheld from Rhoda since

Rhoda is anticipating marriage. Finally she is convinced that both of these problems must be answered affirmatively. Rhoda finds it difficult to decide whether it is her duty to marry the man who offered his hand first or to marry the one she loves. Her conscience finally dictates that she is not duty bound to marry without love, and she marries her lover, Onley.

The Rise of Silas Lapham does two things: first, it points out the many unethical practices followed in the commercial world and, second, it 33 shows that ethics can he practiced in the business world. Unlike many bus¬ iness men, Silas is constantly grappling with his conscience as to the right¬ ness and wrongness of things. Silas and his wife believe that every cent of their money has to be earned honestly or that they have no right to it. These two characters seem to convey Howells' belief that it pays to do right. The three works which were discussed above are illustrative of the author's appli¬ cation of his humanitarian doctrine to his treatment of life. In his treat¬ ment of ethics he closely follows his theory that all literature should moral¬ ize even if the moral is subtle. An Imperative Duty to a great extent mani¬

fest his belief in equality of all men in the sight of God.

There is a spirit of satire in the novels in which Howells views the effects of the industrial revolution and its counterpart, capitalism. This revolt against the existing social order is pronounced in novels like A Hazard of Hew Fortunes and A Traveler from Altruria. When he established himself in New York, he was brought into close contact with cosmopolitan thought, and the brutal and ruthless eoonomic and social conditions were distressful to him.'*' In grappling with the questions brought about by these conditions and the issues which drifted in with the new current of thought, Howells is de¬

finitely a satirist. Particularly is he critical of the inhumaneness of the

existing economic order.

Theory and practice are incongruent when held up to the light of indus¬

trialism. The conflict between capital and labor is revealed in his presenta- 2 tion of a great labor strike in A Hazard of New Fortunes. But the middle and

^Russell Blankenship, op. cit., pp. 47-48. ^A Hazard of New Fortunes, I, 220-234. 34 upper classes constitute the subject matter in wnat have been arbitrarily

called his economic novels. The Negro, the immigrant laborer, miners, and

other "sweatshop" employees are treated only as they relate to the portrayal

of the two other classes.

Notwithstanding the fact that all of the people involved in or affected by the coming of the Machine Age are not treated, the situation is vividly

depicted. The speech of Colonel Woodburn describes this situation against which there is revolt.

"I do not contend that it is impossible, madam, but it is very difficult in a thoroughly commercialized society, like yours, to have the feeling of a gentleman. How can a business man, whose prosperity, whose earthly salvation, necessarily lies in the adversity of someone else, be delicate and chiv¬ alrous, or even honest?.... But the virus of commercialism was in us too; it forbade us to make the best of a divine institu¬ tion, and tempted us to make the worst. Now the curse, is on the stamp of every success. What does not sell is a failure; and what sells succeeds.

The element of chance involved in the capitalistic struggle cannot be

overlooked. To this phase of the economic condition there is strong ob¬

jection. The inability of man to cope with the realities of the competi¬

tive struggle is condemned utterly. Through Basil March in A Hazard of

New Fortunes Howells renders a bitter complaint against chance.

"What I object to is this chance-world in which we live, and which we men seem to have created. It ought to be a law as in¬ flexible in human affairs as the order of the day and night in the physical vrorld, that if a man will work he shall both rest and eat, and shall not be harrassed with any question as to how his repose and his provisions shall come. Nothing less ideal than this satis¬ fies the reason. But in our state of affairs no one is sure of this. No one is sure of finding work. No one is sure of not losing it. I may have my work taken from me at any moment by the caprice,

•*~A Hazard of New Fortunes, I, 229-230. 35

the mood, the indigestion of a man who has not the qualification for knowing whether I do it well or ill. At my time of life—a man ought to feel that if he will keep on doing his duty he shall not suffer in himself or in those who ere dear to him, except through natural causes.*1 The economic barriers 6et up by the amassing of wealth or the lack of it result in social barriers in that a wide span exists between the million¬ aire and the workman who has been displaced by an invention. Such a con¬ dition conflicts with Howells* belief in democracy and brotherhood, and it is this situation which is being satirized when the Altrurian asks, "Am I right in supposing that the effect of your economy is to establish insupera¬ ble inequalities among you and forbid the hope of the brotherhood which your

Q polity proclaims?"

Howells lived at a time when America was expanding in all directions— commercially, agriculturally, industrially, and geographically. To build railroads, develop the West, and finance industry in general, speculation was necessary. As some men made fortunes, others lost them. It was a ques¬ tion of survival of the fittest. Greed blinded men to all scruples. Howells* description of this cycle of getting and losing is found in a conversation in which Basil March is a participant. "...and so we go on, pushing and pulling, climbing and crawl¬ ing, thrusting aside and tramping underfoot; lying, cheating, stealing; and when we get to the end, covered with blood and dirt and sin and shame, and look back over the way we*ve come to a palace of your own or the poor house, which is about the only pos¬ session we claim in common with our brother-men...."®

Given the economic problems and Howells* treatment of them, let us see if creed and treatment are harmonious. Theory and practice of realism are

•hibld.. II, pp. 252-253. O A Traveler from Altruria (New York, 1894), p. 98. 3 A Hazard of New Fortunes, II, 253. 36 carried out in his preference of the novel of character and situation as a vehicle for transporting life into fiction rather thantrust such a task to the novel of romance or adventure. Throughout A Traveler from Altruria all the social and economic problems are brought to light. However, a shallow treatment occurs. Here, too, is an excellent exemplification of the democratic impulse in Howells. The Altrurian's Utopia contrasted with the injustices and inequalities found in America shows Howells' disgust at the current order of things.

Howells substantiates his contention that literature should make men know one another better and the human race kinder. This substantiation is relayed through one of his characters who says:

"If you can make the comfortable people understand how the uncomfortable live, it will be a very good thing, Mr. March. Sometimes it seems to me that the only trouble is that we don't know one another well enough; and the first thing is to do this."

Howells fails to do this, and his reader's curiosity about the uncomfortable people is not satisfied. Herein, then, lies the greatest fallacy in his treatment of economic problems: the comfortable people are made known, but the lowest class of society is not portrayed and all eyes are focused on a small portion of society.

The preceding discussion of the phases of American life paves the way for a study of the American people whose lives have been discussed. Pre¬ viously it has been pointed out that Howells limits his portrayal of the

American people to two groups. Now the question is how does he treat that segment of the populace with vhich he is concerned. As a novelist of manners his characterization is good. We are made to know and understand the

1Ibid.. I, 195. 37 aristocracy and the "nouveau riche." We see many Americans clamoring to reach the upper bracket of society (the Boston society of which the author is quite fond); and in their failure to do so, they go abroad and seek to assimilate themselves with European society. We get the reaction of the aristocracy to the middle class who try to crash the circle of the aristocracy. This is accomplished through the medium of type characters.

Eor a discussion of type characters, the Coreys, the Rallecks, the Dry- fooses, and the Gaylords are adequate. It seems that Howells has given us the

Coreys as the very quintessence of the best Americans—the native American aristocracy. They are rich, distinguished, and refined. But they are not exactly in accord with their socially inferiors entering their circle; how¬ ever, they are tolerant of other levels of society. It is interesting to contrast this prominent family in The Rise of Silas Lapham with another on the same social plane, the Hallecks, in A Modern Instance. The Halleeks are stiff and artificial. They are intolerant of and impatient with their soc¬ ial inferiors, all of which is typical of most members of this class. The

Dryfooses in A Hazard of New Fortunes are endowed with the attributes of the "nouveau riche." They have money but not culture. Here we have an example of the unrest and homesickness which resulted from the newly ac¬ quired fortunes and the change in the original way of life. The Misses

Dryfooses are frustrated at not being'^accepted," and all of their coarse¬ ness is brought out in their attempt to compensate for it. In A Modern

Instance the Gaylords are a very good representation of the middle class.

They are well-to-do and have the average American sense of values. The fatherly love of Squire Gaylord and the contempt he has for his son-in-law show tenderness and devotion of parent and child. 38

Taken as a whole, the fiction of Howells presents a calvacade of men and women who are deeply implanted on the reader’s mind. Heroes like Bart¬ ley Hubbard, Silas Lapham and Northwick are unforgettable. The author’s attitude toward the masculine sex in general is found in the characteriza¬ tion of Bartley Hubbard. The typical self-made American is Silas Lapham.

Northwick’s characterization affords the most penetrating analysis made of any character, and Northwick is the only criminal hero.

To know Silas Lapham is to know the struggles of any self-made American.

Many of the qualities found in him are the traits necessary for anyone to get ahead in this world. It was initiative, patience, ambition, and courage which enabled him to achieve hie ideal. The character of Silas Lapham is truly

American. His success in business compensates for the lack of social prestige.

There is a moral earnestness which guides him through the unpleasant ordeal of bankruptcy. There is no essential change in character after the loss of his fortune, but rather a development. Morally, he felt somewhat guilty about a business transaction with an earlier business partner; however, in the final settlement with all his creditors, this partner is well paid.1 This frees Si¬ las’ conscience completely. The characterization of Silas is illustrative of the Howells’ belief that a change in character must come from within.

In characterizing Bartley Hubbard, Howells is not completely objective— not objective enough. His attitude toward Bartley seems to be one of wrath.

Bartley is an individual acting and reacting in the same way any other or¬ dinary person would in similar circumstances. Bartley is a type, but typi¬ cal of a class. He is typical of the clever, unscrupulous newspaper man with

^See Chapter XXV of The Rise of Silas Lapham for a more precise account of Silas’ moral earnestness. 39 a spark of genius. He has good as well as bad points, but he is blamed for all of his faults and those of his wife also. The whole effect is that of an unfaithful and untrustworthy husband.

Two impressions are traceable in the portrayal of Northwick: the im¬ pression of criminalityand the impression of a mental disorder. The first impression is given at the beginning of the book when it is revealed that 1 the hero is a defaulter. But as soon as he begins to relive the embezzle¬ ment this impression diminishes. After he reaches Canada, his mental de¬ rangement overshadows the impression of criminality which previously exist¬ ed. From this point on psychology is exhibited. His conscience is dis¬ turbed; he cannot think clearly, and his impassivity becomes painful. This is Howells' most penetrating characterization.

Howells' treatment of masculine characters follows his theory along three lines. First, there are no ideal or noble heroes; they perform no improbable feats; and they arerepresentative of actual human beings. Se¬ condly, they are endowed with the "common grandeur." Thirdly, they mani¬

fest the author's feelings toward the people whom he has his characters represent.

In his private life Howells spent much time in the company of women, and in his fiction there is a preoccupation with women. Firkins says of himj "He tells us that power in the delineation of women is the best of 2 artistic mastery in fiction. The arresting fhct is that Howells knows women so well and finds them so good. It is for this reason that it is difficult to deduce why he has been deemed a critic of women. Occasionally

■*-The Quality of Mercy, pp. 8-9. 2 Oscar IN. Firkins, William Dean Howells (Cambridge, 1924), p. 296. 40 he criticizes the vanities and whims of women, but when his works are considered collectively, he glorifies womanhood. He is able to do this because he shuns the prostitute and the base and immoral woman. In treating women, particularly in love affairs, he penetrates their hearts in a reverent manner. The portrayal of Marcia in A Modern Instance is the best example of this. She is pictured as being absurdly loyal and unwordly. She is not blamed for her selfishness and jealousy. Her innocence is exaggerated in that she is found innocent of many things and circumstances for which she should be blamed. To concede that

Marcia is typical of the average woman is impossible. She handles situations too divinely and expertly to be real.

Another heroine is Dr. Breen in Dr, Breen’s Practice. However, Howells' thesis is that a woman's place is in the home and her duty is that of ful¬ filling social obligation. The author seems to find it difficult to keep this girl faithful to her false ideal. He seems to have contempt for her because she attempted to enter the medical profession. Grace Breen's love for humanity and her desire to render service evoked reference from the author in the end.

He says of her:

At the end of the ends she was a Puritan; belated, misdated,... and cast upon good works for the consolation which the Puritans formerly found in a creed. Riches and ease were sinful to her, and somehow had to be atoned for; and she had no real love for any¬ thing that was not of an immediate humane and spiritual effect.1

A Chance Acquaintance and the Lady of the Aroostook have the same theme— conflict between passion (love) and class. In these two novels, more than any other, Howells' fondness of Jane Austen is revealed. He grapples with the problem of love versus class as Jane does in Pride and Prejudice. Kitty is

\>r. Breen's Practice (New York, 1881), p. 270. 41 a lovable, congenial young woman from western New York. These qualities in her gradually won over the snobbish Bostonian who loved her but resented her class. Lydia Blood, the heroine of Lady of Aroostook, is of the same class as Kitty, the heroine of A Chance Acquaintance. Lydia's case is likewise one of a cultivated man with a passion for an uncultivated girl.

She is timid and chaste and possesses rare beauty. Her lack of culture does not cause her to fret. She makes no deliberate effort to impress him or move into his circle. Staniford, who loves her, is deeply im¬ pressed by such admirable traits, and is finally won over.

To his gallery of feminine portraitures must be added Lina Bowen of

Indian Summer. This woman is pictured as being simple and attractive. She has the unique combination of quietness and liveliness. Her dignity in playing the role of a guardian is superb. She is always tactful, handles all situations gracefully, and is well versed. It is not an exaggeration to assert that Lina is Howells' conception of American womanhood—a real

Mlady.”

Individually, these women of Howells that are under consideration do embody some of the traits found in an ordinary American woman, but the overemphasizing of many of the virtues attributed to them cannot be accepted as good representation of any one woman. As a group they are endowed with the characteristics found among women in general. By not depicting the passions and emotions that women are capable of entertaining, Howells ad¬ heres closely to his tenet of decency. For this reason his general treat¬ ment of women is stiff and artificial rather than natural. In all cases their love is kept chaste and pure. Even when madly in love, a careful eye is kept on their actions. Even Marcia, the most life-like among them, is checked in her mood of madness, and her affair with Ben Halleck is 42 closely guarded so as to become -vulgar. The greatest obvious fallacy in the characterization of his heroines is that ethics and moral standards govern them and not sincere feelings.

Wot only does Howells object to the hero of romance, indecency, and unfaithful representation of life, but also to a dramatic climax and highly pitched plots. In other words, he advocates democracy in method as well as material. For him the novel that ends well is the novel that ends faith¬ fully. A truthful presentation of materials necessarily involves a truth¬ ful method. No attention should be devoted to a careful manipulation of plot. If a happy ending is in keeping with the characters and their situa¬ tions, so well and good; but if not, the plot should be appropriate to the characters and their plights. He believes that if commonplace things and ordinary people are treated, they cannot be treated in an unusual and grotesque manner.

In the handling of plot, Howells comes close to making theory and practioe congruent. His only deficiency is in the lugging in of an un¬ warranted love affair in The Quality of Mercy. The love affair of Louise and Maxwell in this novel is out of keeping with the general scheme of things; it seems to be floating with no direct relation to the theme. North- wick is the main character, and the plot revolves around him. Maxwell is a minor character and so is Louise. Their love affair does not aid in the characterization whatever. If it had been left out, the theme would remain unaltered.

Not a single incident or ending in any of the novels under considera¬ tion is improbable. The reader is made to feel that the novels had to end the way they did. The fact that people do not transgress and then by some 43 trick of fete live "happily ever afterwards," and that novels do not nec¬ essarily have to end in such a manner, is shown by the way the plot is handled in A Modern Instance. Had this marriage not ended in a divorce, the author would have exhibited a deficiency in obeying the foundation of his creed. In Indian Summer the reader may at times be led to believe that the complications which came as a result of Imogene's and Mrs. Bo¬ wen's love for Colville would end disastrously. However, this complica¬ tion is worked out in a natural maimer, and every action and dialogue ad¬ vance in a natural manner. Before the reader is cognizant of it, a logi¬ cal and anticipated end has occurred.

An excellent job of establishing probability is achieved in the eleven novels included in this study. In A Chance Acquaintance and the Lady of

Aroostook the probability for a happy ending is established after the char¬ acters have been introduced. Both of these girls are endowed with qualities which would have made a tragic or semi-tragic ending inappropriate. With the kind of eoonomic situation in which Silas Lapham found himself, and with the commercial world as it is, could a bankruptcy have been avoided? It is true that a careful analysis of Dr. Breen's Practice reveals that plot is not emphasized, but enough emphasis is placed on it to aid in characteriza¬

tion. The series of incidents that take place give vitality to the charac¬

ters involved. The incidents move forward in a flowing manner and progress along with the portraits that are drawn. We are able to follow the sequence and are led on to an expected outcome. Not once is the reader made to feel that Grace Breen can live up to her false ideal. All along in the story pro¬ bability is established for the triumph of love over duty.

In all of the novels examined the tone of incidents is natural. However, 44 we have seen that the characters' aotions and reactions were not always natural, but this does not alter the tone of the incidents themselves.

It must be admitted that the courtroom scene in A Modern Instance is some¬ what dramatic; nevertheless, it is only natural fbr anger and emotions to show at suoh a time.’*’

In the handling of plots no radical incongruity between theory and practice exists. The method used by Howells as well as the material is commonplace and natural. Howells departed from romanticism in handling plots because he felt that it was in opposition to the ways of present¬ ing material truthfully. If life is commonplace and ordinary, then there is no place in fiction for distortion of facts in order to reach an extra¬ ordinary or dramatic climax. Just as he looked upon noble and exalted heroes as belonging to romanticism, he felt the same way about melodrama¬ tic and superhuman incidents in fiction.

A Modern Instance (New York, 1881), pp. 495-504. CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION

No American writer has provoked as much criticism as William Dean

Howells. The status of no American author is more questionable than his.

From the rank of "Dean of American Letters" during the latter half of the nineteenth century, he has been relegated to the position of a writer of yesterday. His novels hold no special interest for the reader of today; but once read, novels like The Rise of Silas Lapham, An Imperative Duty, and A Modern Instance are unforgettable. The novels as a whole are still invaluable to scholars in the study of the development of the novel in

America.

The most arresting fact about the variety of criticisms on Howells’

fiction is that they go from one extreme to the other. Certain nineteenth

century critics held that the fiction of Howells was too coarse and vulgar.

Most twentieth century critics have labeled his realism as tepid or genteel.

While the twentieth century critics generally agree that Howells’ realism

is of the mild type, nineteenth century critics differ in their evaluations.

Just as Howells shocked the modesty of some of his contemporaries, he was wholly acceptable to others. That Howells was an exponent of realism is

not denied by any critics since the turn of the century. In arriving at

these judgments three criteria have been used by scholars: the modern con¬

cept of realism, the American scene of the author’s day, and all the sec¬

tions of the country as sources for settings.

Very few critics have attempted to write novels to illustrate their

theories as Howells has done. His effort to set forth his literary doctrine

resulted in a number of important critical documents. The basis for his

45 46 criticism of fiction lies in the assertion that the function of literature is to reflect life as it is lived. In order to achieve this he suggests

four principles of realism. First, all humans share certain equal experi¬ ences, and all humans have an equal right to portrayal in literature. Se¬ condly, these experiences of humanity should be truthfully recorded. Third¬ ly, the author should be subjective* that is, he should depict what he has observed of human nature as well as his reactions toward human nature.

Fourth, reserve and limitation should be exercised so as to not offend or

corrupt the reader.

The American scene to which Howells applied his doctrine of realism was one of many problems. Industry and commerce had brought about an age

of capitalism and expansion. This, in turn, brought about urbanization of

factory centers and the growth of cities. The migration of people from the rural sections created all kinds of problems from that of earning a living

to securing shelter.

It has been revealed that in Howells’ treatment of this scene there are

some inconsistencies between theory and practice. In regard to the social

and economic problems Howells does uphold his gospel of truth as far as he

goes. His weakness lies not in the fact that he does not tell the truth

but in the fact that he does not tell the whole truth. His failure to ex¬

ploit the depths of society and bring to light the man whose efforts merely

afford an existence, the youth who never enjoys the advantages of a demo¬

cracy, and the woman who stoops to anything for a livelihood is very

noticeable.

Because he wanted to avoid passion, many of Howells' characters are

stiff and artificial, especially is this true of his women. He had, more 47 or less, cultivated a high esteem for American womanhood, which occasionally shows up in his portrayal of women. While, on the other hand, his contempt- o u s attitude toward men likewise reveals itself; thus causing a biased pre¬ sentation of masculine characters. Yet, through Howells' characterization one can discern the types of people who composed the aristocracy and the middle class of the author's day.

The events which take place in the lives of Howells' men and women are not absurd. Like the Marches, many found it difficult to obtain lodging in

New York and other metropolitan areas. Divorce was the climax to many marriages. Quite a few of the newly rich followed the fhd of going abroad.

All in all, there are no fantastic, impossible, or melodramatic elements in the plots of his novels. As a matter of fact, there is consistency in meth¬ od (handling of plots) and material.

We have seen that at some time or other all of Howells' principles were violated except the principle of decency. His diction never offends; ’’vulgar”

incidents never occur; and crime and bestality are not prominent in his fic¬ tion. He said that the "more smiling aspects of life" are to be treated, and he treated these only.

Even if Howells is not a thoroughgoing realist according to his concept

of realism, his significance in the history of American letters cannot be

overemphasized. Before condemning a figure like Howells, three questions

should be asked: Was America ready for realism as the naturalists con¬

ceive it? At a time when the romantic spirit was still popular, was it

possible to inaugurate realism as we think of realism today? Human nature being what it is, can a creed or ideal be made an ultimate reality?

These questions can only be answered negatively. No literary movement 48

displaces another entirely, and no literary movement comes into prominence

overnight. The step from romanticism to realism was gradual, and Howells was the impetus which gave realism full motion. He successfully bridged

the gap between romanticism and naturalism. The novels of Howells had to

be thrust upon the reading public gradually. Too much boldness and re¬

volt would have been harmful to the cause of realism. In perceiving an

ideal or goal, many impossibilities and limitations are not perceived.

In all probability Howells was aware of the fact that he did not practice

his gospel at all times. But the amazing thing is that Howells theory, if

closely analyzed, is in a way paradoxical, which means that in violating

one principal, he upholds another.

Regardless of the criticism of Howells he will always hold a unique

and significant place in the history of American letters. Modern critics

point to Howells as a writer of yesterday, but his doctrine of realism is

basic and timeless. Whereas he fell short of being a genuine realist, he

paved the way for later writers like Theodore Dreiser, Frank Norris, Sin¬

clair Lewis, and Richard Wright. Realism with all its ramifications is

enhanced in present day fiction, directly or indirectly, because of the

struggle in which Howells engaged for realism. BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES

Novels

Howells, William Dean. A Chance Acquaintance. Bostons Osgood, 1873.

. The Lady of the Aroostook. Bostons Houghton Miff¬ lin Co., 1879.

. Dr. Breen's Praotice. Bostons Houghton Mifflin Co., 1881.

. A Modern Instance. Bostons Houghton Mifflin Co., 1881.

. The Rise of Silas Lapham. Bostons Houghton Mifflin Co., 1885.

. Indian Summer. Bostons Houghton Mifflin Co., 1886.

. A Hazard of New Fortunes. New Yorks Harper and Bro¬ thers, 1889.

. An Imperative Duty. New Yorks Harper and Brothers, 1891.

. The Quality of Mercy. New Yorks Harper and Bro¬ thers, 189121

. A Traveler from Altruria. New Yorks Harper and Brothers, 1894.

. The Kentons. New Yorks Harper and Brothers, 1902.

Criticism

Howells, William Dean. Criticism and Fiction. New Yorks Harper and Bro¬ thers, 1891.

. My Literary Passions. New Yorks Harper and Brothers, 1895.

. Literary Friends and Acquaintances. New Yorks Har¬ per and Brothers, 1900.

. Literature and Life. New Yorks Harper and Brothers, T9Ô2T 49 50

. "The Editor's Study,” Essays in Harpers from 1886- 1892.

. "Emile Zola,” The Nation CXXXV, 588.

SECONDARY SOURCES

Books

Baldwin, Charles. The Men Who Make Our Hovels. New Yorks Dodd, Mead and Co., 1925.

Blankenship, Russell. American Literature. New Yorks Henry Holt and Co., 1931.

Cooke, Delma Gross. William Dean Howells. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., 1922.

Firkins, Oscar W. William Dean Howells. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1924.

Harvey, Alexander. William Dean Howells. New York: B. W. Huebsch, 1917.

Knight, Grant C. American Literature and Culture. New York: Ray Long and Richardson R. Smith, Inc., 1932.

Leisy, Ernest E. American Literature. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell and Co., 1929.

Manly, John M., and Rickert, Edith. Contemporary American Literature. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1929.

Parrington, Vernon L. The Beginnings of Critical Realism in America. Vol. III. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1930.

Pattee, Fred Lewis. American Literature Since 1870. New York: The Century Co., 1915.

Quinn, Arthur H. American Fiction: An Historical and Critical Survey. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co., 1936.

Rourke, Constance. American Humor. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1931.

Snell, George. Shapers of American Fiction. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., Ino., 1947.

Van Doren, Carl. The American Novel. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1929.

Wilson, Edmund (ed.). The Shock of Recognition. New York: Doubleday, Doren and Co., Inc., 1943. 51

Articles

Allen, James Lane. "Caterpillar Critics," The Forum, IV (November, 1887), 332-41.

Atheron, Gertrude. "Why Is American Literature Bourgeois." The North American Review, CLXXVIII (May, 1904), 771-78.

Edwards, Herbert. "Controversy Over Realism in American Fiction," American Literature, III (November, 1931), 237-48.

Gratton, C. Hartley. "Howells; Ten Years After," American Mercury, XX (May, 1930), 42-50.

Lawerence, C. E. "William Dean Howells," The Living Age, CCXCIV (July 21, 1917), 173-77.

Perry, T. S. "William Dean Howells," Century Magazine, I (March, 1882), 680-85.