FICTION.

In modern times much that is best in literature has gone into the pages of the novel. The men and women of genius who would in other days have been great poets, philosophers, dramatists, essayists, and humorists have concentrated their powers, and poured out all their wealth to set in gold a story of human life. Don't neglect the novels; but be sure to read good ones, and don't read too many.

In fiction, England, America, and France are far ahead of the rest of the world. Scott may well be held to lead the list, considering the quantity and quality of what he wrote; and Dickens, I presume, by many would be written next, though I prefer the philosophic novelists, like George Eliot, Macdonald, Kingsley, Hugo, etc. Fielding, Richardson, Goldsmith, Sterne, and Defoe, Jane Austen, Cooper, and Marryat all claim our attention on one account or another.

The United States can boast of Hawthorne, Tourgée, Wallace, Hearn, Aldrich, Warner, Curtis, Jewett, Craddock, and many others.

France has a glorious army, led by Victor Hugo, George Sand, Balzac, Dumas, Gautier, Mérimée, etc. But the magnificent powers of these artists are combined with sad defects. Hugo is the greatest literary force since Goethe and Scott; but his digressions are sometimes terribly tedious, his profundity darkness, and his "unities," his plot, and reasons for lugging in certain things hard to find. Balzac gives us a monotony of wickedness. George Sand is prone to idealize lust. "Notre Dame" and "Les Misérables," "Le Père Goriot" and "Eugénie Grandet," "Consuelo" and "La Mare au Diable," "Capitaine Fracasse" and "Vingt Ans Après," are great books; but they will not rank with "Tom Jones" artistically, nor with the "Vicar of Wakefield," "Ivanhoe," "Adam Bede," "Romola," or "The Scarlet Letter," considering all the elements that go to make a great novel.

Germany, Italy, and Spain have no fiction that compares with ours.

No doubt many will be surprised to find Fielding, Balzac, Tolstoï, and others placed so low in the list as they are. The reason is that the moral tone of a book is, with us, a weightier test of its claims on the attention of the general reader, than the style of the author or the merit of his work from an artistic point of view. There might be some doubt whether or no we ought not to exclude from our tables entirely all books that are not noble enough in character to admit of their being read aloud in the family. The trouble is that much of the finest literature of the world would have to be excluded. So there seems to be no course but to admit these men, with a note as to their character.

One who wishes to make a study of the novel will be interested in Dunlop's "History of Fiction," Tuckerman's "History of English Prose Fiction," Hazlitt's "English Novelists," Lanier's "Novel," Masson's "British Novelists and their Styles," and Jeaffreson's "Novels and Novelists."

The best fiction should be read: R. D. G.