00001.tif

PDF

Download

Open document

Transcript (if available)

Content THE RECEPTION OP THE WRITINGS OF JOSEPH CONRAD IN ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES FROM 1895 THROUGH 1915 by Henry Van Slooten A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (English) January 1957 UMI Number: DP23017 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI DP23017 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 U N IV E R S IT Y O F S O U T H E R N C A L IF O R N IA G R A D U A T E S C H O O L U N IV E R S IT Y P A R K L O S A N G E L E S 7 PK. 0 £ '57 T his dissertation, w ritte n by under the direction o f G uidance Com m ittee, and approved by a ll its members, has been p re sented to and accepted by the F a c u lty of the G raduate School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirem ents f o r the degree o f D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y & >_crorK.e^ Dean 1 1 7 . 7 Guidance Committee * - / a h a trm a n INTRODUCTION This is a study of the critical and popular reception of Joseph Conrad’s writings from 1895, when his first hook was published, through 1915, when his books were sold widely enough to assure him financial independence. I have considered carrying the study forward 1 to 192^, when Conrad died, but have found that the last nine years of his life merely repeated what had become apparent by the end of 1915— that he had at last achieved popular success as a writer. Because Conrad had to depend for his success on the readers of chiefly the two countries in which his books first appeared, I have limited this study to the reception of his writings in those I countries— England and the United States. Although concerned mainly with the critical and popular 1 reception of Conrad’s fiction and reminiscence which appeared in book form from 1895 through 1915, this study has also given due regard to the question: Was the impression the critic and the book-buyer formed j of Conrad as a writer based upon the appearance of his writings as j individually published magazine pieces, or as books? Even a cursory ! I examination of the published criticisms of Conrad's writings of i ! these years reveals that many of his separate stories, serialized 1 : novels, and essays were virtually unknown to more than a few until they were published in book form; therefore, this study has been ! chiefly one of the reception of the books. This does not mean that published criticisms of writings in magazines and newspapers have not been taken into account; it means rather' that the study, although arranged in time on the basis of the appearance of Conrad’s books, has also given attention to comments on his writings of any nature which were printed during these years. The dual nature of the reception of Conrad’s writings (it was < S slow among the book-buyers and quick among the literary men of his day) has not gone untreated by men who have written about Conrad. At least three critics, H. L. Mencken, Edward Garnett, and John D. Gordan, have given attention to one or both phases of it. I H. L. Mencken gave the earliest treatment of both phases of it | in his A Book of Prefaces in 1917* In that work he traced Conrad’s j i career through the lean years to the years after 191^, when his books ; I J were more widely sold, and thus became the first writer to examine 1 J at length this important aspect of his reception, one which had been I suggested in only a sentence or two by previous critics. He also i I ! considered in some detail the critical reception of Conrad by such men I i as James Huneker, William Lyon Phelps, Frederic Taber Cooper, John r Galsworthy, Sir Hugh Clifford, Bichard Curie, and Wilson Follett. Experienced readers of Mencken were probably not surprised to find ' him frequently objecting to the criticisms of earlier writers in | somewhat sweeping terms. Huneker, he said, went "little beyond the obvious"; Phelps achieved "only a meagre judgment"; Cooper tried "to 1 i : estimate things ... in the light of his Harvard enlightenment"; ' Galsworthy wasted himself "in futile comparisons"; and Clifford made "irrelevant objections to Conrad’s principles of Malay psychology." i Curie’s criticism of Conrad’s writings, the first book-length criticism of them, he maintained, was "the worst study of them all." | On the other hand, Follett's book, which appeared in 1915--one year after Curie's, contained much valuable criticism. In fact, aaid Mencken, Follett was the only writer on Conrad who had not contributed to the "almost valueless" criticism that had been published on him up to the end of 1915-^ The next fairly detailed treatment of Conrad's reception, one of the popular reception only, was that by Edward Garnett in his preface to his edition of Conrad's letters to him. It did not appear until 1928, four years after Conrad's death and included in the space of j just a . few pages a . succinct account of the slow sale of Conrad's first half-dozen books.^ \ ' The most thorough examination of Conrad's reception (both 1 'critical and popular) as a writer has unquestionably been that con tained in John Dozier Gordan's Joseph Conrad; The Making of a | o I Novelist.In this work Gordan painstakingly analyzed the forces that affected Conrad's writing from his earliest days as a seaman through the time of the publication of Youth in 1902, forces that [helped, as Gordan said, to "make" Conrad a professional writer. I Gordan wrote in detail of Conrad's difficulties in preparing his ‘early manuscripts for publication, his early financial difficulties, | and Conrad’s own reactions to the neglect of the wide public he | 1"Conrad," in A Book of Prefaces (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1917). ^Letters from Joseph Conrad: 1895-1924. ed4Edward Garnett (London: The Nonesuch Press, 1928). ^(Cambridge: The Harvard University Press, 19^0). I sought. In fact, Gordan’s final chapter, "Conrad and the Public," with its detailed analysis of the reviews of Conrad's books from Almayer1s Folly in 1895 through Youth in 1902 provides an excellent beginning for any study of the reception of the writings of Conrad. It seems proper, however, to regard it only as a beginning because, during the years covered by Gordan's study, Conrad never achieved popular success as a writer, even though he did achieve success of another, and probably compensatory type— success with a small group of devoted and understanding readers, all persons of standing in the literary world of his day. There seems indeed to be strong evidence to support Gordan*s statement: Since the press disappointed him, since the general public would not buy his books, Conrad compensated himself with the idea of an audience of friends who would appreciate his every intention.^ 'But Gordan did not consider just how completely this "audience of friends" actually understood every intention of Conrad because the line of direction ordered by the limits of his thesis led elsewhere. i In this study I have tried to analyze the response of the "audience ! jof friends," as well as that of other critics, to determine why it |took at least ten years after the publication of Youth in 1902 before Conrad could regard his writings as reaching a multitude of readers rather than only a few. In appraising the reception of Conrad's writings by critics I have had to make liberal use of reviews, which did have the advantage for a study such as this of reflecting the immediate reactions of ^Gordan, p. 306. 5 critics to each of Conrad's -works as it appeared. But, since the reviews often possessed the disadvantage of tending in some degree to isolate each of Conrad's writings from the others in the stream of his development, as well as that of being less deliberately- written than longer (and usually signed) articles which treated larger segments of Conrad's work, I have generally found articles I more useful in this study than reviews. Unfortunately, much of the criticism of persons who were in a position to know Conrad's work best did not appear in print for the 1 public to read during his lifetime, being in the form of letters i I which were not published, usually, until after the death of each ! I ; letter-writer. Some of the best evidence of this sort is that contained in a series of twenty letters to Conrad from Edward Garnett, iConstance Garnett, E. V. Lucas, H. G. Wells, George Gissing, Rudyard i Kipling, John Galsworthy, Arnold Bennett, Stephen Crane, Henry James, j and James Huneker. These letters, found in Conrad's home after his death and privately printed by Georges Jean-Aubry, were the only ! i letters Conrad received from literary figures of his own time which I ' 1 he saved. Their usefulness in this study can hardly be over-estimated.. Other letters did pass between persons interested in Conrad's career as a writer and did find their way into print, usiaally after his death. Letters of this type, like the ones written by Galsworthy j to Garnett, have been very useful in this study because they were j probably more candid than the letters from such literary men to > Conrad, at least more candid than those he saved. Other letters I which I have found extremely useful in this study were those Conrad j wrote to other literary men of his day. Fortunately, a great number of such letters have been published. These letters often show that Conrad received criticisms, usually favorable ones, from literary persons interested in his work. Much of the favorable reception of I his work by Bobert Bontine Cunninghame Graham, for example, can be 1 documented only by evidence of this type. I Other sources of information I have found useful were the Journals, autobiographies, and biographies written by or about persons who commented on Conrad's work. The utility of such sources j I is apparent from the fact that some of the most candid statements by | Arnold Bennett have been found in his Journal, just as similarly j I candid statements by H. G. Wells have been found in his autobiography. ! i Biographies of literary men who knew Conrad have also been found help- I ful chiefly because they sometimes contained letters to, from, or about Conrad that had not been printed elsewhere. i To such sources of critical comment as those already mentioned must be added other sources which served to provide information on ithe popular reception of Conrad's writings. In order to obtain ^information on the size and frequency of printings of Conrad's works, I jl wrote to all publishers in the United States and Great Britain who \ in my opinion might possess such knowledge. Where I have been unable I to obtain information of this type from publishers, I have made use | ! [ of the writings of such bibliographers as Thomas J. Wise and George ! T. Keating, who not only have published descriptive bibliographies of Conrad's writings but have also included information on the size i and frequency of early printings of them. ! Material of this last kind has served to show clearly the difficulties Conrad had in achieving a broad acceptance as a writer. There can be little doubt that Conrad sought a broad acceptance from the beginning of his literary career, for in 1896 he strongly objected to Garnett's suggestion that "a writer must follow his own path and disregard the public's taste." "I won't live in an attic!" he exclaimed, "I'm past that, you understand. I won't live in an attic I"'* But it is obviously idle to speculate on whether or not he would ever have begun his second novel in 1895 if he had known that j for almost twenty years he would not eke out a bare living as a writer, j 1 1 Fortunately, he had only the fate of Almayer's Folly in mind when he j 1 wrote to T. Fisher Unwin on March 12, 1895: I return to town next week— for the l8th. Isn't the 18th the date for the appearance of a certain immortal work?! I warn you that if I am disappointed I shall surely have some kind of fit; and if I die on your office carpet the Conservative papers will have big headlines: 'horrible cruelty of a well-known publisher,' and not even the bravery of the young man of the Daily Chronicle shall save you from popular fury. The above frivolity of expression disguises a very deep feeling. In common mercy to a suffering fellow creature let 1 it be the 18th, without fail. I am— in great anguish— , Yours very faithfully 6 J. Conrad. ^Preface to Letters from Joseph Conrad, p. xiii. Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating (New York: Doubleday, Doran & Company, 1929), p. 9* CHAPTER I RECEPTION OF ALMAYER'S FOLLY AND AN OUTCAST OF THE ISLANDS Conrad's first novel, Almayer's Folly,is an account of the degeneration of a European in the Malayan tropics. In it Almayer sees his dreams of returning to Holland crumble when his beautiful daughter marries a chieftain of her Malayan mother's people. When it appeared in 1895, much of what British reviewers said about it was favorable. The Saturday Review called it "a very powerful story in deed, with effects that will certainly capture the imagination and haunt the memory of the reader."1 The Speaker called it "distinctly powerful, and not less distinctly original," and informed its readers: It is impossible to forget the book, with its vivid glimpses of Eastern life. , . . If Mr. Conrad can give us another story i as striking and life-like as this, his place in our literature | ought to be an assured one.2 | The Spectator offered Conrad similar encouragement, by commenting, "This is a decidedly powerful story of an uncommon type, and breaks I 3 j fresh ground." | Other English reviews were favorable, but not unreservedly so. i \ James Ashcroft Noble, in the Academy. said: j The work is more of a promise than a performance. ... It is j difficult to say what the promise amounts to. ... It cannot 1LXXIX (June 15, 1895), 797. Since most of the reviews of Conrad's novels are anonymous, I have often attributed opinions in such reviews directly to the periodicals in which they appeared. Opinions cited in this way, unless specifically noted, are not those of the periodical editors but those of the anonymous reviewers. 2XI (July 29, 1895), 723. 3LXXXV (October 19, 1895), 530. 9 be declared an -unequal success. . . . Still, the book somehow leaves an impression of grasp and power 11116 Athenaeum termed the novel "a genuine piece of work," which, "in spite of several crudities and awkwardnesses," showed "considerable promise."''* The London Bookman admitted that it stood "far apart 1 among the common run of novels," but objected: Why it does not take its place among those of first-rate power and excellence is difficult to say with any precision, for indeed it has great qualities, picturesqueness, poetry, deep human sympathy, restraint, and literary quality of a very marked kind. ... In bits it is excellent and earns instant admiration. As a whole it is wearisome.® Only one of the American reviews of Almayer's Folly, that in the Bookman, was wholly favorable. In it James MacArthur exclaimed, Hot since Budyard Kipling sent a thrill of delight through readers of two continents with the fresh surprise of his discovery of India have we received the same startling pleasure from exploitation of a foreign country, hitherto shut out from public ken. Almayer's Folly is unmistakably. . . a serious and valuable contribution to literature and a book to be read and re-read.7 Other reviews of the novel accorded it either stinted praise or adverse criticism. Arthur Waugh, in the Critic, began with an admission that "on almost every side" it had "received kindly notice"; then objected, "This, one feels, is a little too generous"; |and finally concluded, "There is no doubt that the book is making its way. Mr. Conrad has certainly begun his literary career with ScLVII (June 15, 1895), 502. 5(May 25, 1895), pt. 1, p. 6jl. 6LIII (September, 1895), 176. 7II (August, 1895), 39. 10 „8 a remarkable success. The Book Buyer called the life depicted in the novel "sordid and common," but admitted both that the author laid "a firm hand on impulse and passion" and that the story had g "pathos as well as power." In a second review, the Critic called j the novel "rather too long," though "powerfully conceived," and suggested that readers of it turn from Conrad’s "lurid passion" to Pride and Prejudice as a "curious and not altogether unprofitable experiment."^ The Literary World declared that the novel was "a rather dull and dreary story of a Dutch trader in Borneo," which I was "crude and repulsive," but it admitted that the local color . was "vivid" and "well applied."^ Almayer’s Folly was accorded its harshest criticism in this comment which appeared in the Nation: | A novel in which the only white man of importance is a Dutch trader, while all the women are Malays or half-castes, does not promise-much entertainment. It is well, therefore, to approach "Almayer’s Folly" with no expectations. . . . Borneo is a fine field for the study of monkeys, not of men. The only interest- ; ing native of Borneo got away and was long ago introduced to an astonished civilization as "The old man from Borneo p j Who's just come to town." Among particular features of the novel, Conrad's characterization ; j received much attention. General comments on the characterization of i I ! 8N. S., XXIII (June 29, 1895), ^8l. j %II (July, 1895), 353. 10N. S., XXV (May 9, 1896), 335- 1]-XXVI (May 18, 1895), 155- I 12LXI (October 17, 1895),.278. I 11 the major persons of the novel were for the most part favorable. The London Bookman stated that Conrad had "drawn his major characters 13 well"; the Spectator. that "all the leading characters in the 1^ book "were well drawn"; and the Book Buyer, tha.t the author had 15 laid "a firm hand on impulse and passion." James Ashcroft Noble, in the Academy, offered only slight dissent to such favorable opinion by objecting, "The only weakness which may be really sig- I f i nificant is a certain indistinctness of portraiture." Opinions differed on how pitiable Almayer appeared. The Speaker declared, The deterioration of character consequent upon his life of semi barbarism is faithfully and forcibly presented; it is impossible j not to feel a deep pity for the man, and even a certain respect | for his character.1' The Nation also regarded Almayer as pathetic, though "almost lost in j the mob of raging heathens engaged in battle for rum and wives on 2_ q j the banks of a river in Borneo”; whereas the Athenaeum found him j merely "a pitiable creature. . . whose nerveless doings arouse little interest."1^ The characterization of Nina, however, was commented upon more k I i I 13LIII (September, 1895), 176. ; 1^'LXXXV (October 19, 1895), 530. ^ I I (July, 1895), 353. l6XLVII (June 15, 1895), 502. 1?XI (July 29, 1895), 723- l8LXI (October 17, 1895), 278. 19(May 25, 1895), pt. 1, p. 671. favorably. The Critic remarked that the "gradual reawakening of Nina’s savage nature" was "an interesting, if painful, process, told 20 with convincing and downright earnestness." James MaeArthur, in the Bookman, made a similarly favorable appraisal of the character- 21 ization of Nina. Little was said about the minor characters in the book. The Book Buyer contained only a rather perfunctory comment that its 22 people were "merely trading-folk, natives, and half-breeds," and 23 Arthur Waugh made a similar comment in the Critic. However, the London Bookman objected that the minor characters were "very „ oh. - hard to distinguish until the story was well advanced. As a matter of fact, very few periodicals even mentioned the minor characters by name. Two of them (the Athenaeum and the Saturday Beview) mentioned Dain Maroola as Nina’s lover but did not consider him as a character in his own right, and one mentioned briefly the "humor" of "Babalatchi ’ s grinding the hand-organ when the Rajah, 25 his master, could not sleep." The lack of comment upon the characterization of Babalatchi is rather surprising— particularly when it is recalled that it had so impressed Garnett, one of the 20N. S., XXV (May 9, 1896), 335. 21 II (August, 1895), 4l. 22 XII (July, 1895), 353. 23 XXIII (May 11, 1895), 3^9. 2k , LIII (September, 1895), 176. ^Saturday Beview, LXXIX (June 15, 1895), 797- 13 26 first readers of the manuscript. Becognition of Conrad's absorption with characterization had the effect of reducing attention to his handling of the plot of the novel. Except for the remark in the Spectator that the plot was 27 "not so well compacted as it might have been," this feature of his work was left unconsidered. A fundamental contradiction arose among reviewers from their attempts to understand the reason for Conrad's deliberate narrative pace. This contradiction may have arisen partially because he did not clarify his conception of the function of the narrative writer I until he wrote his now-famous preface to The Bigger of the "Narcissus"< in 1897* "My task which I am trying to aohieve," he said then, "is, | ! by the power of the written word, to make you hear, to make you feel— it is, before all, to make you see. That— and no more, and 28 I it is everything." Conrad's desire to cake his readers see had two 1 results: it often slowed the action of his narrative to a complete ' I stop, but it did impress the early reviewers with his descriptive powers. Because he believed that scenes of greatest suspense had to be most thoroughly felt and seen by his readers, Conrad dealt I ! i ^See Letters from Joseph Conrad, ed. Edward Garnett (London: The Nonesuch Press, 1928), p. vi. Hereafter cited as Letters from : Conrad. I r ''' i I 2?LXXXV (October 19, 1895), 530. [ 2%*he Nigger of the Narcissus. New York: Doubleday, Page i & Company, 1914, p. x. (This edition of the novel was the first that included the preface with the text of the novel.) Ilf carefully with all the important components of such scenes, partic ularly human motivation, which he worked into his canvas against a background from Nature. When successful, he created an organic unity of Man and Nature that could produce an affecting passion like the wrath of Lear on the moor. Unfortunately his first critics could not see that to create the atmosphere which heightened his great moments and deepened his great moods, he had to retard his action. Thus several periodicals complained that the action of the novel was too slow. One objected, for example, that the action i dragged because Conrad stopped "to describe" during "breathless I I 29 dramatic moments." Others, while also objecting to Conrad's I deliberate pace, spoke of it in terms of style. Arthur Waugh objected, "Mr. Conrad is far from being a master of his art, and 30 tells his story with plentiful circumlocution." The Athenaeum 31 made the same objection, and the Critic objected to the lengthening of the novel that resulted from Conrad’s concern for building each ! 32 1 scene in detail. | Conrad's ability to create atmosphere was widely acclaimed. ( ! The Critic, after objecting that the novel was too long, commented: ! The splendor of the tropical scenery is portrayed with such , | picturesque fidelity, however, that we can feel the very j ; 1 I 29 Bookman (London), LIII (September, 1895)? 176. 3°Critic, N. S., XXIII (May 11, 1895), 3^9. 31(May 25, 1895), pt. 1, P. 671. ; 32N. S., XXV (May 9, 1896), 335. i languor which emasculates all Europeans under the influence of the great river beside which Almayer passed the years of his life and fading hopes.33 3lj. The Athenaeum praised the book for its "admirably graphic passages” and the Saturday Beview praised it for effects that would "certainly capture the imagination and haunt the memory of the r e a d e r ."35 The Bookman3^ and the Speaker37 contained similar statements of praise. Because of the concern with atmosphere as a feature of method— distinct as well as distinctive, it is surprising that the relation ship between the narrative pace and the atmosphere of the novel was discovered. Credit for this insight went to the reviewer who wrote in the London Bookman. "The slow, vague, mysterious East has cast its spell over Mr. Conrad, with results not conducive to the interest of volatile European readers. But he has written pages of singular fascination."3® The factor of tone was commented on less often than that of atmosphere, to which it was allied. In different periodicals AImsyer*s Folly was designated as "a sombre tale,"3^ "a gloomy tale," 33XXV (May 9, 1896), 335- 3^(May 25, 1895), Pt. 1, p. 671. I 35LXXIX (June 15, 1895), 797- j j 36II (August, 1895), *H. , 37XI (July 29, 1895), 723. 3®LIII (September, 1895), 178. 3^Speaker. XI (July 29, 1895), 723* ^Saturday Review, LXXIX (June 15, 1895), 797* 16 and "not wanting in sombre impressiveness." It would be difficult, of course, to assess the effect on Conrad’s reputation of these early comments upon the melancholy tone of his novels, but it seems not unlikely that they would discourage many readers in the habit of looking for lightness of tone in their reading fare. Conrad's use of a new locale for his fiction was widely ! commented upon. The Spectator predicted that he might become "the * t Kipling of the Malay Archipelago," James MacArthur made the same j h3 ' i prediction in the Bookman. However strange such comparisons to ; Kipling seem to us now, particularly in view of the fundamental j difference in temper of the two writers, some readers of the comparisons may have come to later books of Conrad expecting fiction I I in the manner of Kipling. American reviews tended to be distinguishable from British j reviews in two particulars--their comparative brevity and (MacArthur* sj in the Bookman excepted) their objection to Malaya as a setting for j fiction. The most vigorous objection, that in the Nation, has ( already been cited (see above p. 10). Arthur Waugh, in the Critic, I l made the same objection by stating that he hoped Conrad’s novel kk J would not occasion "a torrent of Bornean fiction." Waugh’s , I ! I objection was later repeated in the same magazine by another I I ; ^Academy. XLVII (June 15, 1895), 502. j ^2LXXV (October 19, 1895), 530. ! k3II (August, 1895), 39. ^N. S., XXIII (May 11, 1895), 3^9- 17 writer. Although not as directly hostile to Conrad for his choice of setting, the Literary World and the Book Buyer probably did Conrad similar disservice with American readers by giving disproportionate attention to the local-color factor in Almayer's Folly. Without even mentioning any of the major figures of the novel by name, the first stated: The only strong scene in the book is that in which the old Malay woman, Almayer's wife, gives her daughter advice on how to handle her Malay rajah. This shows remarkable insight into the point of view of the Eastern woman who looks forward to the life of the zenana and accepts its customs as the natural and inevitable lot of women. ° And the other, in a review consisting of only four sentences, i opened with these lines: "Almayer's Folly" by Mr. Joseph Conrad is an Australian story, but constructed along unusual lines. Its people are merely trading-folk, natives, and half-breeds, and its plot is based on the success or failure of certain commercial speculations.^7 Except for James MacArthur's favorable comments in the Bookman. ! there was little in critical comments by Americans to encourage I j Conrad to write "another novel." As shown above, though, there ! was much in British comments from which he could take comfort. There j was certainly more favorable criticism than adverse. British reviewers who were least inclined to regard Almayer's Folly as a serious contribution to English letters were at any rate willing to ^5N. S., XXV (May 9, 1896), 335. ^XXVI (May 18, 1895), 155. ^7xil (July, 1895), 353>________ _____________________________ 18 withhold judgment until the next novel appeared. Whether Conrad was encouraged or discouraged by the reception which periodicals gave Almayer's Folly, the urgings of Edward Garnett were sufficient to keep him at work on its sequel, An Outcast of the Islands, so that hy the time he was reading the reviews of the first novel, Conrad had written much of the second. Although he had difficulties in writing the book, which often made it necessary to * 1 - 8 call upon Garnett for his "dear, precious, brazen flattery," he worked on through the summer of 1895 and was able to inform Garnett on September 17th of "the sad death of Mr. Peter Willems late of Potterdam and Macassar. . . ."^9 The book did not appear as scheduled in the fall of that year though. Mrs. Conrad said later, This book was to have appeared in November, 1895, but the stereo plates were burnt in a big printer's fire, and the publication was delayed till the year we were married. In fact, the book n only a day or so before our wedding on 24th March, Like Almayer's Folly, An Outcast of the Islands was an account of the degeneration of a European in the tropics. In it Peter Willems, unable to resist the attractions of a beautiful Malayan girl, betrayed his European friends and, after realizing his own perfidy, was killed by his mistress. In some important respects it was better received than the first novel had been. Among British ^®Letter of June 7, 1895* Letters from Conrad, p. 10. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 12. Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him (Garden City: Doubleday, Page 19 periodicals only the National Observer was not favorable. "We are sorry we are not able to write more appreciably of what is evidently a careful and conscientious piece of work," it said, "but as it stands An Outcast of the Islands is undeniably dull. . . . Even schoolboys will have some difficulty in getting through it, and we „51 fear adults will find it impossible. In the United States the Nation again objected to Conrad’s choice of setting. "The accident of residence in Borneo, Celebes, and circumambient isles has tempted him to write novels," it said, "and has therefore made him appear a 52 person of little discernment and poor judgment."^ But all other periodicals, except the New York Times and the London Bookman, expressed almost unqualified praise for Conrad's second novel. Neither of these two contained any degree of censure, the first being concerned only with giving a brief resume of the work, unaccompanied by criticism,^ and the second being almost equally non-committal. "If he JCoxxradJ meets with the success | which he deserves," said the second, "his seafaring days are probably ,,5^ over. Most American periodicals praised An Outcast of the Islands very highly. The Literary News declared, "'An Outcast of the j Islands' by Joseph Conrad, Is one of the most remarkable novels ! f that we have read for years. ... Mr. Conrad is a man of 51 (April 18, 1896), p. 680. 52LKIV (April 15, 1897), 287. ^(September 23, 1896), p. 10. ^LIV (May, 1896), 4l. genius."-^ The Guardian urged, "The hook is well worth reading for 56 its own merits, as well as for its freshness."^ The Bookman stated, "Mr. Conrad has already proved his fitness to portray Malay life. The same power that he showed in Almayer's Folly has served 57 him here." And the Book Buyer, in a brief but wholly favorable note, closed with the line: Under Mr. Conrad's revealing touch the rich and fatal splendour of the tropics seems to determine the moral life of its en chanted prisoners, and the severest censor of their history finds reprobation giving place to pity.5° English periodicals, also chiefly favorable, were usually more detailed in their praise of the new book than those in the United States. The Athenaeum, recalling its reservations about Almayer * s Folly. said that the promise of the first novel had been fully realized in the second, one which it considered "a perfectly genuine piece of work, the outcome of extensive experience and close observation, allied to a subtle power of analysis and an intense »59 and poetic appreciation of the beauties of the tropical landscape. James S. Little, in the Academy, said, "Mr. Conrad is to be heartily congratulated on his performance; it falls little, if at all, short of being a masterpiece." The Speaker commented enthusiastically: 55N. S., XVII (October, 1896), 307- ^(June 10, 1896), 906. 57iv (October, 1896), 778. 58x111 (October, 1896), 537- 59(juiy 18, 1896), pt. 2, p. 91. 60XLIX (June 27, 1896), 525.___ _______________ ___ 21 If we cannot say that "An Outcast of the Islands" is a revelation, it is only because the revelation was made when "Almayer's Folly" was published. The present work is a notable and worthy successor to the other.°1 The Spectator. no less complimentary, said, "We do not often come across a novel of such power as Mr. Conrad's An Outcast of the Islands. Among the praises in British periodicals, however, most important to Conrad was that of H. G. Wells, then a reviewer for the Saturday Beview. Wells withheld his praise until he had enumerated the faults of Conrad's style--indeed, until he had actually rewritten a rather 1 I long descriptive passage; then he declared, I Subject to the qualifications thus disposed of, "An Outcast j of the Islands" is, perhaps, the finest piece of fiction that ■ has been published this year, as "Almayer's Folly" was one of J the finest that was published in 1895-3 t Conrad's characterizations were praised in almost all periodicals. Except in the complaint in the National Observer that "unhappily, his characters, on whom he has expended considerable 6k pains, are not in themselves particularly effective," periodicals found the people of his books very credible. The New York Times, for example, gave evidence of Willems*credibility by denouncing him with great vehemence as "the most despicable of human beings," as j 6lKIII (April 1896), 376. LXXXVI (May 30, 1896), 778- ^LXXXI (May 16, 1896), 509-510. (Conrad immediately wrote Wells, expressing his appreciation for the review, and friendship 1 between the two men ensued. See below, p. 31.) (April 18, 1896), p. 680. j 22 65 "a swindler," and as "an ungrateful blackguard." Other periodicals proclaimed Conrad’s merits as a creator of character more directly. The Bookman, for example, stated: Mr. Conrad's chief power is psychological. It is a terrible psychology, released with as awful an imagination as we can remember in present fiction excepting Stevenson. Conrad seizes psychological moments which have a relentless hold on the memory, and, taken in succession, make a narrative terror from which the imagination shrinks.”® The Book Buyer stated: The strength of the book lies in the delineation of the hero, which reveals the rapid deterioration of a character conven tionally upright, but possessing no guarantees of conscience, self-respect or honor, and undermined by a colossal self esteem. ' ; Briefer and more general approval was expressed in the Guardian, ! where the characters of the novel were found to be "manifestly 68 jtranscripts from real life," and in the Literary News, where the 69 novel was called "a profound study of character." Similarly 70 favorable opinions were expressed in the Academy and in the 71 Athenaeum.1 In characterizations of particular persons, the Spectator paid special attention to Lingard, whom it called I I September 23, 1896), p. 10. 66IV (October, 1896), 778. 67 ' XIII (October, 1896), 537. /TO (June 10, 1896), p. 906. 6%. S., XVII (October, 1896), 307. 7°XLIX (June 27, 1896), 525. 71 (July 18, 1896), pt. 2, p. 91. ____________________________ 23 the one grand character of the book, . . . conceived on the colossal scale of primitive romance, who looms through the atmosphere of crime and sensuality like a legendary type of rugged, incorruptible manhood.72 Wells, in the Saturday Review, found Almayer, Babalatchi, and Abdulla— as well as Lingard— to be "living realities, . . . all novel, all authentic," and he further declared, "Conrad imagines his scenes and their sequence like a master, he knows his individualities to their hearts."73 Conrad’s descriptive powers were also highly praised. The Spectator maintained that "the descriptions glowed with life and 7h colour," the Athenaeum called attention to Conrad’s "intense and 75 poetic appreciation of the beauties of the tropical landscape," and the Hew York Times said, "You catch at times a scent of that miasma that is ever lowering over the pestilential swamps of the Sambir country." Other periodicals contained not only statements indicating enchantment by Conrad's descriptions but also comments upon the relationship of the descriptions to the situations involving the characters of the novel. The Guardian commented: The story is fantastically unlike anything that would occur to European ideas, but it does not seem impossible as the spontaneous upgrowth of the locality. The characters, as j i T2LXXXVI (May 30, 1896), 778. ^IXKXI (May 16, 1896), 510. j 7^LXXXVI (May 30, 1896), 778. , 75(July 18, 1896), pt. 2, p. 91. j ^(September 23, 1896), p. 1 0 .________________ _ 2k veil as the scenery, are manifestly transcripts from real life J? The Bookman stated: Conrad feels the tropics in all their thirsty intensity, their gloom, their alluring beauty, their poison for the Northern nature. . . . As he pictures the fatal love of the tropics, fatal to decoy, fatal to cling, fatal to kill at last, the treachery that has betrayed it, . . .he again asserts the contrast between the Eastern character and the type of Westerner that is bred in contact with it— not, certainly to the credit of the latter.7° 79 Similar comments were made by James S. Little, in the Academy, and I 8o in the Book Buyer. Despite these warm appreciations of Conrad * s ability to create tropical atmosphere, his style was still criticized in some I periodicals as a feature of his work that bore no relation to it. ! I The National Observer, for example, objected to earlier comparisons I ' , 1 ” ” I T " " " " " r ' " ' ' n i r " " " of Conrad to Kipling on the ground that Kipling was "a master of » rapid delineation of character, of vivid directness of style,*' whereas Conrad spread "his story over a wilderness of chapters and j pages" and let it wander "aimlessly through seas of trivial detail" , until it melted "away in a desert of words.H. G. Wells 1 complained in even greater detail of Conrad's style, as follows: , One fault he has, and a glaring fault. ... Mr. Conrad is wordy; his story is not so much told as seen intermittently 7T(June 10, 1896), p. 906. ?8IV (October, 1896), 778. 79xLIX (June 27, 1896), 525. Rn XIII (October, 1896), 537. (April 18, 1896), p. 680. ___ _____ 25 through a haze of sentences. His style is like a river-mist; for a space things are seen clearly, and then comes a great grey bank of printed matter, page on page, creeping round the reader, swallowing him up. You stumble, you protest, you blunder on, for the drama you saw so cursorily has hold of you; you cannot escape until you have seen it out. You read fast, you run and jump only to bring yourself to the knees in such mud as will presently be quoted. . . . Following this criticism Wells included in his review a long passage from Conrad in which he suggested the deletion of many phrases and sometimes whole sentences. He then continued: It never seems to occur to Mr. Conrad to put forth his effect and leave it there stark and beautiful; he must needs set it and explain it, and refer to it and thumb it to extinction; and it never seems to dawn upon him that, if a sentence fails to carry the full weight and implication it was meant to do, the remedy is not to add a qualifying clause, but to reject it and try another. His sentences are not unities; they are multitudinous tandems, and he still has to learn the great j half of his art, the art of leaving things unwritten.®2 The first interest in Conrad as unique among writers of his day began with the publication of An Outcast of the Islands. The review ! in the London Bookman opened with the remark: "It will not surprise ! readers of *Almayerts Folly,* that remarkable novel where wild nature ! and strange humanity were so powerfully portrayed, to learn its | i author has led an adventurous life." It continued with several i interesting and quite accurate details about Conrad himself: Conrad I was a Pole "for all his skillful adoption of our language"; he had always been interested in literature, his father having translated ' Shakespeare into Polish; with his father and mother he had been "imprisoned" in Bussia for the political activities of his father and he had been a sea-captain and had sailed "most quarters of the ^Saturday Review, LXXXI (May l6, 1896), 510. globe.”83 Another type of insistence upon uniqueness was probably more harmful to Conrad's future as a writer. The Literary Hews praised the second novel as "one of the most remarkable novels that we have read for years/' but made the prediction that "it may not be Alt one for which ordinary novel-readers will care much." This 85 prediction was also made by James S. Little in the Academy. By mid-1896 Conrad's drift toward writing a,s a professional j career was much stronger than he supposed. The reviews of both novels gave him cause for some encouragement, those of the second j probably more than the first. He himself was pleased to find that ; 1 one of the early ones of An Outcast of the Islands called him a "disciple of Victor Hugo" and was, as he said, "very complimentary! Very!" Others he felt were also complimentary. "But," he exclaimed, "there is plenty of criticism also. They find it too long, too much j description,— and so on. Upon the whole," he concluded, however, I "I am satisfied."88 Conrad had even more reason to be satisfied with the reception I given his first two books by major literary men of his day. Among them, the first reader of note to be attracted was Edward Garnett, 1 0 I ! who (as a reader for the British publisher T. Fisher Unwin) read 1 ; i | 83LIV (May, 1896), kl. ®Sr. S.,XVII (October, 1896), 307* I 85XLIX (June 27, 1896), 525. ; AA ' Letter to Mrs. Sanderson, dated April 6, 1896, in Joseph Conrad j Life and Letters. ed. Georges Jean-Aubry (Hew York: Garden City, I 1927) I, I87. Hereafter cited as Life and Letters. __________________ j 27 Almayer*s Folly in manuscript. Kecalling his first impressions later, Garnett said that he had "been at once "captivated by the i figure of Babalatchi, the aged one-eyed statesman, and the night scene at the river's edge between Mrs. Almayer and her daughter." G > This impression, together with "the strangeness of the tropical atmosphere, and the poetic 'realism' of this romantic narrative," he remembered, excited his curiosity about the author, who, he 87 fancied*"might have eastern blood in his veins." 1 Within a few / i days Garnett arranged a meeting with Conrad, and as a result of i the meeting Conrad acquired a friend who was to work hard to 1 further his career as a writer in the years that followed. j 1 ! At the first meeting of the two men Garnett suggested to i Conrad, "You have written one book. It is very good. Why not ' 88 ^ write another?" Garnett seems to have made precisely the right | suggestion, for about twenty-four years later Conrad said: i If he had said to me, "Why not go on writing?" I should have been paralysed. I could not have done it. But he said to me, "You have written one book. It is very good. Why not write another?" Do you see what a difference : that made? Another? Yes, I would do that. I could do ' 1 that. Many others I could not. Another I could. That is I how Edward made me go on writing. That is what made me an author .§9 J Conrad soon began the composition of "another" novel, manuscript , 1 chapters of which he sent to Garnett for criticism and praise. His ! letters to Garnett during 1895 showed clearly his doubts about ^Letters from Conrad, P* vi. ^Letters from Conrad, P. V . ^Letters from Conrad, P- vii. .28] i himself as a writer, and Garnett had to convince him that An Outcast of the Islands was more than "frightful bosh" or "a heap of sand," 90 as Conrad at different times called it. Unfortunately Conrad did not save any of Garnett’s letters of encouragement which were written to him during the composition of An Outcast of the Islands, but we can quite readily infer from Conrad’s grateful replies that 91 each portion of manuscript was accorded high praise by Garnett. In the spring of 1896, as Conrad began the composition of a later novel (which was to appear in 1920 as The Rescue), the 1 1 relationship between Conrad and Garnett probably assumed a pattern j 1 that it was to follow for many years. After receiving and reading I ! some chapters in manuscript, Garnett would write Conrad such praise | I as the following: ! Excellent, oh, Conrad. Excellent. I have read every word of j The Rescuer, and think you have struck a new note. ' The opening chapter is most artistic; just what is right for ! an opening chapter. The situation grips one with great force. It is clearly and forcibly seen, as if one had spent a month on those seas— (that is the highest praise). . . . And the whole has a new note which is most taking to me. I think it will strike the Public (the great gross Public that you accuse I me of knowing!) as very interesting and f r e s h .92 I J Only after such praise would Garnett offer the additional help he i j felt Conrad needed, usually such constructive criticism as this: ; ^Letters from Conrad, pp. 9 and 172. | ^Letters from Conrad, pp. 5-13- . _ T_ n , . 92Letter from Edward Garnett, dated May 26, 1896, in Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry (London: the First Edition Club, 1926). Hereafter cited as Twenty Letters. Since these letters are unpaginated, they will be cited by date, except where only one letter was written to Conrad by a given correspondent.___________' 29 I enclose some hasty criticisms— mere whims of mine, on only minute points. The only page I would, like to see altered is page 1. There the description, the tone, seems to me not up to your level. The feeling— though poetical— seems a little forced, a little dragged out of you, a little over-elaborated— and not in keeping with the clear realism of all the forcible, vivid 2k pages that follow.93 Because of Conrad*s need for encouragement during these early years, it would seem difficult to over-estimate the importance of Garnett1s role in making Conrad a novelist. Garnett's claim that he "saw in turn and commented on An Outcast of the Islands, Tales of Unrest, The Mgger of the Narcissus, The Rescue, first draft, and tentative chapters of The Sisters"9^ was an overly modest claim, for I an examination of the letters Conrad wrote him during his lifetime reveals that Conrad also sent him the manuscripts of Lord Jim and The Arrow of Gold, a manuscript of part of Suspense, and possibly ■ 95 i also an early draft of Under Western Eyes. | In addition to his assistance as critic and adviser, Garnett's I appreciation of Conrad's first two novels took another very concrete form. As a man with many acquaintances in the publishing world, q6 1 Garnett was able to introduce Conrad to William Heinneman, who was I to publish Conrad's third novel (The Nigger of the Narcissus), and to Reginald Smith,9^ a partner in the publishing firm that was later to I ^Letters from Conrad, p. 5 9 1 4 - Letters from Conrad, P- V . 95 Letters from Conrad, PP . 72, 280, 308, and 237. ^Letters from Conrad, P. 53. ^Letters from Conrad, P- 56. 30 publish Romance, This additional proof of Garnett's appreciation of his work must have meant much to Conrad, particularly when it is recalled that he later said that his first view of New Grub Street was "as inviting as a peep into a brigand's cave and a good deal less reassuring."9® Other appreciations of one or both of Conrad's first two books must have been made privately to Conrad by John Galsworthy, whom j Conrad had met while he was chief mate of the Torrens in 1890. j 1 Because Galsworthy was younger than Conrad, both in age and as a j writer, it was some years before he wrote public appreciations, but I after Conrad's death in 1924 he recalled what he felt when he saw I Conrad's first work: Only one expression adequately describes the sensations of us , who read Almayer's Folly in 1894. We rubbed our eyes. Conrad j was critically accepted from the very start; he never published j a book that did not rouse a chorus of praise, but it was twenty 1 years before he was welcomed by the public with sufficient ! warmth to give him a decent chance.99 E. V. Lucas was also an early admirer. After reading Almayer * s Folly, he arranged to meet Conrad some time late in 1895 or early j in 1896 for the purpose of obtaining a story for Cornhill.1^ 1 Letters from Conrad, p. xi. ■ 99j0im Galsworthy, "Reminiscences of Conrad," in Castles in Spain and Other Screeds (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, I927), I p. 108. Galsworthy's reference to 1894 instead of 1895, the year I Almayer's Folly was published seems to validate a suggestion his sister made that Conrad took the MS. of this novel to the Sanderson home at Elstree where it was read and criticized by Galsworthy and others. See M. E. Reynolds, Memories of John Galsworthy (New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company, ^n.cU/1 ), p. 126. 100 Letters from Conrad, p. 7* 31 As a result of his efforts in Conrad's behalf, "The Lagoon" appeared in Cornhill in January, 1897. As has already been shown (see p. 21 above), An Outcast of the Islands was enthusiastically praised by H. G. Wells. Conrad, after reading Wells's review and discovering the identity of the reviewer, wrote a letter (now lost) to Wells and received the following cordial reply: I am very glad indeed that my review of-your book was to your liking, though I really don't see why you should think j gratitude necessary when a reviewer gives you your deserts. | I Since you don't make the slightest concessions to the i reading young man who makes or mars the fortunes of authors, j it is the manifest duty of a reviewer to differentiate j between you and the kind of people we thrust into "Fiction" j j at the end, the Maples and Shoolbreds of literature. i ... I could no more write your "Outcast" than I could fly. . . . You have everything for the making of a splendid I novelist except dexterity, and that is attainable by drill. Looking forward to reading your next book,— I do not know whether I shall still be a reviewer then,--believe me 1 Your sincere admirer, 1 j H. G. Wells101 I I Wells later gave more public proof of his appreciation ofAn Outcast 1 I j of the Islands by listing it in a survey published in the Academy I in January, 1897,as one of the nine books of the year that had : ! ! j "impressed him most."102 ! ! i • . I During 1896 Arthur Symons also gave proof of his admiration of | Conrad's work, when he wrote to Garnett, "inviting a contribution 101Letter from H. G. Wells, dated "May, 1896," in Twenty Letters. 102LI (January 16, _____________________________ 32 10S to the Savoy from the author of An Outcast of the Islands," and in November, as a result of Symons's efforts, the Savoy published "The Idiots," a story that had been twice refused by Cosmopolis. Also important among the literary friendships Conrad made with his first two books was that of Henry James. Recognizing that he had to overcome the reserve of the elder writer, Conrad sent James an autographed copy of An Outcast of the Islands. In reply, James sent Conrad a copy of The Spoils of Poynton with this inscription in the flyleaf: "To Joseph Conrad in dreadfully delayed but very j grateful acknowledgment of an offering singularly generous and j beautiful. Henry James, Feb. 11, 1 8 9 7 ' j In summary, it must be said that Conrad's first novel, Almayer *s Folly, did not meet unqualified praise. Although statements of 1 general evaluation in British reviews were nearly all favorable, i those in American reviews (except for that of James MacArthur in ! Bookman) were unfavorable. Fortunately, Conrad improved his reputation with American critics by the publication of An Outcast of the Islands, so that it may be fairly said that statements of | general evaluation of the second novel in both British and American periodicals were chiefly favorable. Statements regarding particular features of Conrad's work also I * I gave evidence of disagreement among reviewers of the two novels. i ^-^Letters from Conrad, p. 4l j ^ • ^Life and Letters, I, 195- Conrad had mailed his own book some time before October 27, 1896, on which day he wrote Garnett, "I have sent Outcast to H/enry/ James with a pretty dedication." 1 Letters from Conrad, p. 195* ■ 33 Comments on the style of both novels were for the most part unfavorable. Conrad's characterizations in Almayer * 3 Folly were regarded as credible and effective in some periodicals and as unconvincing in others. The characterizations in An Outcast of the ' I Islands, however, were more highly regarded. Little attention was given anywhere to Conrad as a novelist concerned with plot. Eeviewers did not all see clearly another feature of Conrad's j work— his deliberate attempt to build scenes for his characters in which they were forcefully, if not always clearly, limned against 1 their tropical backgrounds. What a number of them failed to see j was that Conrad deliberately halted the physical actions of his characters at moments of greatest dram so that he could make his readers see and feel the emotional drama of such moments. Many reviewers of both novels recognized him as a writer who could create I an entrancing atmosphere, but only a few of them saw that he worked ' his atmosphere into his great scenes to enforce their power— always at the expense of external action. Comments on the seriousness of tone in Conrad's first novels were at times made in such a way as to discourage some possible readers of later Conrad novels. His preference for tragedy, which was mentioned in some reviews of Almayer's Folly, was quite definitely proclaimed in a number of reviews of An Outcast of the | Islands. and some critics began to tell their readers to expect 1 only seriousness in Conrad's writing. ! The first articles on Conrad, with their insistence upon his i uniqueness as a writer because of his Polish background, may also ' " ■ ‘ ’ - - 34- have hart his reputation. At any rate, he was later to object to being classed as a "literary freak" simply because he had come to English from another language. More clearly harmful in its effects on Conrad's chances of attracting a wide audience was the prediction in two reviews that Conrad's books would not appeal to ordinary novel-readers. On the other hand, probably the greatest achievement of Conrad's first two novels was that they brought his literary career to the | attention of some of the most important literary men of his day. I Praise by such men as Garnett, Galsworthy, Lucas, Wells, Symons, and James meant much to a man who, at the age of nearly forty, was | I embarking upon a new career. A learned coterie of Conrad readers j | began to form as early as 1896. It would be wrong, of course, to I j j speak of these readers and those who joined the group later as a , circle« even though Mrs. Conrad did use the term in the title of I 105 one of her books. These men were individually attracted to Conrad's writings. Not given to cultism, each of them admired the work of Conrad in his own way, and in their individual expressions I ) of admiration lay a profound tribute to Conrad'3 skill as a novelist. I , He began with his first two books to develop a following of the 1 1 greatest literary men of his day; later books, moreover, were to ! ; 1 ! 1 ' bring more readers of this type. j 1 I 1 I ~^^Joseph Conrad and His Circle (New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, 1935)♦ CHAPTER II RECEPTION OF THE NIGGER OF THE NARCISSUS AND TALES OF UNREST The Nigger of the Narcissus is a realistic account of life in the forecastle of a sailing vessel "bound from Bombay to London. Its chief concern is the response of the crewmen to the lingering death of a Negro sailor. When it appeared in "book form during 1897 and 1898,^ it was more favorably received" than either of the earlier novels had been. Only the Academy accorded it a doubtfully favorable review. "There is so much good writing that one is reluctant to be 1 ! 1 absolutely frank and say that the book as a whole is not well liked," I ! it began. But it then offered as reasons why the novel would not i j be well liked "the small amount of material for the length of the book," the fact that Conrad had "not invented any motif that would ! ! lead the reader on from page to page," the use by Conrad of a common ' sailor as his narrator (a narrator whose "tense, exaggerated, highly poetic diction" was not "suitable to such a character") and the fact that the style"which should allure the reader here repelled him." , 1 ! J However, the novel was praised in other periodicals, particularly J It was published in the United States late in 1897 as The 1 Children of the Sea and in England early in 1898 as The Nigger of the ■ fNarcissus.1 "America would not buy a book about niggers," Conrad ‘ 1 told Hamlin Garland later, "so my publishers changed the title to j * Children of the Sea.' I accepted the change. I was in no situation , ' to object." Hamlin Garland, My Friendly Contemporaries, a Literary j Log (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1932) P* "493.The quotation marks j , around "Narcissus" were dropped from English editions after 1898. I From 1914 onwards .American editions also used the title The Nigger of the Narcissus. 1 1 1 1......... 1 1 1 ■m il""'* j %iction Supplement. LIII (January 1, 1898), 1-2. in statements of general evaluation. The Spectator began: j Mr. Conrad, whose intimate knowledge of the Malay Archipelago was impressivly illustrated in those two power ful but sombre novels, Almayer^ Folly and An Outcast of the Islands. has given us in The Nigger of the Warcissus an extra ordinary picture of life on board of a sailing vessel in the ' merchant marine.^ The London Bookman stated: In spite of an over-minute method that in such a novel, where there is little plot to hurry the reader on, might easily become wearisome and irksome, Mr. Conrad succeeds in interesting us in no ordinary degree.^ The Illustrated London News called the novel "as powerful as any that „5 i has been done in the psychology of the primitive passions of man. | And Literature designated the book as "one of the simplest stories in j our language,"of which it said: ! We have a book typical of the hard, bitter, strenuous, more or - ! less unconsciously brave, and almost wholly unconsciously 1 j dignified, and in a sense, noble life of the sea-faring man in | j trading vessels on the seas, . . . written by one . . . who i speaks at first hand from intimate knowledge both of the sea I itself and of those who go down to the sea in ships.® i Harold Frederic, in the Saturday Review, declared himself happy that Conrad had "turned his back on what was feared to be his specialty, his treatment of the European in a tropical setting," and had "taken ! ship and given us the sea as no other story-teller of our generation I 7 u ( ! has been able to render it. i 1 i i I 3LXXIX (December 25, 1897), 9^0. | ^XIII (January, 1898), 131. ^CXII (January 8, 1898), 50. 6II (March 26, 1898), 35^* TLXXXV (February 12, 1898), 211. _________________ ____________ Some British periodicals praised the novel but detracted somewhat from the originality of Conrad's work by comparing it in only general terms with the work of other novelists. The Speaker, for example,recalled the power of Stephen Crane's The Red Badge of Courage and stated: Mr. Conrad has now followed in the footsteps of Mr. Stephen Crane, and in "The Nigger of The Narcissus" has painted for us a picture of sea-life as it is lived in storm and sunshine on a merchant-ship, which in its vividness, its emphasis, and its extraordinary fulness of detail, is a worthy pendant to a the battlefield presented to us in "The Red Badge of Courage." Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch in the Pall Mall Magazine, remarked that many critics would compare it with The Red Badge of Courage because like Crane, Conrad "squeezed emotion and colour out of every last |drop." But of Conrad, whose work he called "ferociously vivid," he said: He knows the life he is writing about and flings his knowledge at the reader in the truculent fashion we are growing accustomed to. But he knows the inside of his seaman too: he is no mere counter of buttons.^ James Payn, in the Illustrated London News, said that, although Conrad at times manifested "poetic power similar to Hugo’s," there jwas always something about Conrad's manner "which belonged to the . , 1 0 writer." I In the United States Conrad's third novel, which appeared here i as The Children of the Sea, was also praised. T. R. Sullivan wrote 8XVII (January 15, 1898), 83. 9XIV (March, 1898), b28. 10CXII (February 5, 1898), 172. in the Book Buyer: There is a strength of a remarkable kind in the forecastle yarn of Mr. Joseph Conrad. ... In discarding all time-hQnored material and in confining himself to the delineation of character and its development under circumstances of physical discomfort closely allied to privation, the author shows the courage of great skill, which is justified by the result.11 The Bookman said: i Few books have met during the last few years with the unanimous praise which Mr. Joseph Conrad’s The Children of the Sea has elicited. ... Mr. Conrad's fascinating book of sailormen and the sea contains two hundred and eighteen pages, and only one dull one— and that's the blank fly-leaf.12 William Morton Payne, who had been impressed by the reception the novel had enjoyed in England, began his review in the Dial by declaring, 11'The Nigger of the Narcissus’ by Mr. Joseph Conrad has been one of the most successful books of the year in England." The reason for its success, he felt, lay "in its exposition of the psychology of the mutiny, of the storm, ... and of certain typical 13 characters among officers and crew." Briefer, but equally laudatory, comments appeared in other American periodicals. The Literary World said, "Joseph Conrad has written a character sketch— which is what the book really amounts ^ 14 to— that repays a reading." The New York Times declared, "This , volume is commended not only to those who will appreciate a realistic j 1 I t | bit of literary workmanship, but to those who would fain extend a ; ! i i i:LXVI (May, 1898), 350. j 12VIII (October, 1898), 91. j 13XXV (August 1, 1898), 78. ^XZXIX (June 11, 1898), I87. 39 15 helping hand to ’the children of the sea,'” And the Nation, in a review of both Conrad’s Tales of Unrest and The Children of the Sea, said: "Children of the Sea" and "Tales of Unrest," recent volumes of Mr. Joseph Conrad, show an imaginative power which was never let loose in his earlier long-winded tales of South Sea savages and traders. There was less favorable comment on special features of the novel than on the general impression created by it. The Nation, for example, objected to the feature of style. "Conrad’s expression is often I effective," it said, "yet always too copious. Instead of patiently 1 17 seeking the one word, he takes the half-dozen that offer themselves." i Although less unfavorable, Literature objected at length to Conrad’s "vivid, dynamic, often almost conspicuously nervous style." Such i adverse comments were balanced by those of T. B. Sullivan, who wrote, 19 "The style is original, strong, and impressively direct," and William Morton Payne, who wrote that the novel contained "passages of terse poetic vigor" that suggested the "magical utterance of a Pierre Loti."20 The credibility of Conrad’s characterizations was questioned in some reviews. Harold Frederic wrote that, although the cook was "rather well done," Old Singleton and the Captain "somehow do not ^Supplement (May 21, 1898), p. 3^* 3 . 6 LXYII (July 21, I898), 53. 17LXVII (july 21, 1898), 5*f. l8II (March 26, 1898), 35^. • ^Book Buyer, XVT (May, 1898), 351» 20Pial, XXV (August 1, 1898), 78. come out of the canvas." Donkin, he felt, remained "shadowy"; but, he declared, "It cannot be said that the 'Nigger’ himself attains even that limited success. He wearies the reader from the outset, 21 as one feels he bored and fatigued the writer." James Payix also 22 found fault with some of Conrad's characterizations. The opposite view was expressed in several periodicals. The Literary World spoke of the leading characters among the seamen as "strongly individualized— ignorant, rough, and natural, guided by 23 their instincts, and wary of the expression of feeling." This 2 1 4 - opinion was expressed also in the Spectator as well as by William 25 Morton Payne in the Dial. Of more fundamental concern in some periodicals was not how good Conrad's characterizations were, but how worthy life in a iship's forecastle was as a subject for serious fiction. This was implicit in T. B. Sullivan's complaint that the "squalor of the ,26 forecastle was insisted upon unnecessarily and in the contention jin the Illustrated London News that Conrad belonged to the school I 27 jof "fiction-brutality," and was clearly apparent in James Payn's i I ^Saturday Review, LXXXV (February 12, 1898), 211. ^Illustrated London News, CXII (February 5. 1898), 172. I 1 j 23XXXIX (June 11, 1898), 187. 2^LXXIX (December 25, 1897), 9^0. 25XXV (August 1, 1898), 78. 26Book Buyer. XVI (May, 1898), 351. 2TCXII (January 8, 1898), 50. 41 objection to the ’ 'common sailors" of the book as "generally worthless ,,28 personages about whom the story centred. Comments of this type were opposed by others such as Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch's that the crew of the Narcissus was "the most plausible and life-like set of rascals that ever sailed through the 2Q pages of fiction. . . and a good crowd too" y' and by the comment in Literature that this was a book typical of the hard, bitter, strenuous, more or less unconsciously dignified, and in a sense, noble life i of the seafaring man in trading vessels on the high s e a s .30 i Other favorable comments on the worthiness of the crew of the I Narcissus as characters for treatment in fiction appeared in the New York Times3~ * ~ and the Spectator \ i Favorable comments on Conrad’s descriptions were frequently made. Harold Frederic, for example, said of Conrad’s description of the storm: "We know nothing else so vivid and so convincing as the ' way in which the reader is forced, along with the crew, to hang on 33 for dear life to the perilously slanting deck." The interrelation of characterization and description was mentioned by Frederic but was detailed more in this comment, which 28 Illustrated London News, CXII (February 5, 189$), 172- 29Pall Mall Magazine. XIV (March, 1898), 428. 3°II (March 26, 1898), 35^. ! 3^Supplement, (May 21, 1898), p. 344. ! 32LXXIX (December 25, 1897), 940. I 33Sa,turday Be view. LXXXV (February 12, 1898), 211. | appeared in the Speaker: We have had many descriptions of storms at sea before, but none like this. Here is the inside painting of the scene described. The artist has no eyes for the raging ocean and the storm- driven clouds. He concentrates his attention on the deck of the ship; on the seamen, battered, bruised, blasphemous, and hopeless; on the captain, who sees only his vessel, for the safety of which he is responsible to the owners, and regards tempest and sea and death itself as nothing in comparison with the performance of his duty; on the miserable forecastle, where the men have to spend their lives, and where now their very beds are washing to and fro in the rising waters. It is a wonderful picture.3k T. E. Sullivan seems also to have had the interrelation between character development and description in mind when he spoke of I Conrad’s "confining himself to the delineation of character and its development under circumstances of physical discomfort closely 35 allied to privation." But several periodicals mentioned the description of the storm without actually relating it to the behavior of the seamen who fought against it. With the obvious intention of praising Conrad, the Literary World called the description of the storm "as good as 36 any Clark Bussell has written of such an adventure." The Illustrated London Hews comment that the description of the storm was "very well done, though at too great length, and in language too j 37 j technical" was faint praise compared with James Payn’s comment in ■ the same periodical a few weeks later: 1 3^XVTI (January 15, 1898), 8k. 3^Book Buyer. XVI (May, 1898), 350. 36XXXIX (June 11, I898), I87. 37CXII (January 8, 1898), 50. ___ ______ _________________ **■3 Never in any book with which I am acquainted has a storm been so magnificently yet realistically depicted; the description extends over many pages with a dreadful but far from wearisome monotony.3° 39 40 William Morton Payne, in the Dial, and the Academy commented with similar enthusiasm upon Conrad’s description of the storm. The Academy also mentioned the effect of Conrad's description— ‘ an effect possibly observed in other reviews but seldom directly commented upon— the creation of an effective atmosphere. Its comment was not unlike that of T. E. Sullivan, who wrote, "The atmosphere of the rough, rude sea clings to all its pages, which have occasional 4l jdescriptive passages, always too short, of uncommon beauty." The I Spectator declared, "Mr. Conrad has an abiding sense of the mystery I of the immortal sea, and the happy gift of painting her in words ,.li2 that glow with poetic fire. I Without including the reviews here in their entirety it is idifficult to demonstrate what a careful reader feels after reading 'them: that although some of them were unfavorable to Conrad on (particular matters, such as style and characterization, even these adverse criticisms were usually included inside larger and more general judgments that were favorable. The one exception, the Academy I ireview, Conrad himself called to Garnett's attention in a letter ! 38CXII (February 5, 1898), 172. 3%XV (August 1, 1898), 78. ^Fiction Supplement. LIII (January 1, 1898), 1. ^1Book Buyer. XVI (May, 1898), 351. 42 LXXIX, (December 25,_ 1897), _940.______________________________ ""........... kk dated January 1, 1898, as his "one bad" review of the novel to date.^3 Even this review, moreover (as already shown), was in certain particulars favorable. Probably the greatest harm done by the Academy review resulted i from the writer's prediction that "the book as a whole would not be | lik well liked. Further harm was also done to Conrad's reputation--at least with casual readers--by the comment in the Spectator that, although Conrad was "a writer of genius, . . . his choice of themes I ! and the uncompromising nature of his methods" would "debar him from ; I attaining a wide popularity." j i Conrad's next published book, Tales of Unrest, contained five ; 1 stories. Two of these, "The Lagoon" and "Karain: A Memory," had Malayan settings and were chiefly sympathetic portraits of Malayan 1 heroes. The third story, "An Outpost of Progress#" was a psychological! ! j j study detailing a series of occurrences which led to the homicide I and suicide of two Europeans who had been placed in charge of an , { ivory trading post in Africa. "The Idiot," another story in the j , volume (based on an experience Conrad had had during his honeymoon1 sojourn in Brittany), was the tragic account of a French mother who had the misfortune to bear three idiot children. The final story (fourth in order) was a detailed account of the separation of two 1 London aristocrats who found that they could no longer conceal from : I ^Letters from Conrad, p. 117* ^Fiction Supplement. LIII (January 1, 1898), 1. ^LXXXIX (December 25, 1897), 9^0. 1 k5 each other the fact that their marriage was empty. The reviews of Tales of Unrest, though chiefly favorable, were less so than those of The Kigger of the Narcissus had been. Only Literature and the Spectator were unfavorable in their general appraisals of Tales of Unrest. Literature objected: Conrad misuses his gifts in this laborious transcript from the French realists. ... We could pardon his cheerless themes, were it not for the imperturbable solemnity with which he piles the unnecessary on the commonplace. ° The Spectator called Conrad’s "experiment with new materials" (in the stories with non-Oriental settings) "interesting but by no means 47 satisfactory." Among other reviews, two were only mildly favorable. The Literary World, after calling the story-collection "a disagreeable book of a certain amount of cleverness," complained: "Treachery seems a mania with Mr. Conrad, for all but one of his five tales „48 deal with it. The Chatauquan merely gave the following brief and almost non-committal notice of the appearance of the book: Conrad does well to entitle his recent book of stories "Tales of Unrest." They are veritable pen pictures of mental agitations with very appropriate scenic surroundings in which the effect is suggested without elaboration of detail. They are five stories not to be read for a pleasant passing away of time, nor, indeed, at all, if one dislikes unpleasant impressions .^9 But most reactions to Conrad's first book of stories were ^II (April 30, 1898), 507. ^ m x i (August 13, 1898), 219. (June 25, 1898), 20k. ^xxvil (July, 1898), 428. i favorable. William L, Alden, in the New York Times.wrote: Mr. Conrad has finally "arrived." His "Nigger of the Narcissus," . . . his "Tales of Unrest," and his "Outcast of the Islands" have given him a place among the most origins, 1 writers of the day.50 The American Monthly Review of "Reviews, also in a vein of prophecy, declared Conrad to be "beyond doubt one of the ’coming men,' ... 51 among those whose reputations could still be regarded as minor." T. E. Sullivan, in the Book Buyer, remarked that the wide range | of the stories indicated Conrad's "varied study of humanity and his r preference for themes far removed from commonplaces." He found the 1 stories powerful, although two of them (which he did not name) he ! I 52 i I considered "grim beyond endurance.” William Morton Payne, in his s j review in the Dial, was chiefly interested in the stories that revealed to him the Conrad of the first two novels. "Three of the * stories are sketches of the Dutch and Spanish Indies," he said, "a j region which Mr. Conrad’s imagination has annexed to English literature as completely as British India has been annexed by the imagination of Mr. Kipling, or the South Sea, Islands by Stevenson 53 and Mr. Stoddard." The Athenaeum said that, of the five, "there is : 5^ 1 not one that is not worth reading." | Two periodicals commented upon Conrad’s ability to depict I I ! i 50 Supplement (May 6, 1899) j P* 30*4-. j ^ XVIII (December, 1898), 729* 1 52XVI (May, 1898), 351. ^XXV (August 1, 1898), 78. ^(April 30, I898), pt. 1, p. 5 6 * 4 - . 1*7 grimness and horror, a talent on which Arthur Symons was later to ha.se much of his interesting critical study (see below pp. 227-28). The Nation declared, "To call the volume of shorter tales 'Tales of Unrest' is to understate the case. They are all in one way or 55 another quite horrible." And the Critic closed its review by saying: * The reader, as he lays down the book, does not feel at one with himself or with the world. He finds himself confronted with the questions that faced him in front of Verestchagin's fields ; of blood and fragments of men--What is Art?--and to what end?56 i i For the most part, critics recorded their impressions of the , whole volume rather than of the individual stories in it. However, those who treated the stories individually commented favorably on every story but "The Return." William Morton Payne wrote, "Karain: a Memory' and 'An ©utpost of Progress' are masterly studies of the contact of civilization with the alien races of the East Indies."^The( I Nation said, "’The Idiots' might have been done by Maupassant; it has something of that air of imperturbable veracity which gave his writings such authority as might abide in an official edict of ; 58 ! Fate." The Spectator praised "Karain: a Memory" and "The Lagoon" as stories that illustrated Conrad's "marvelous insight into certain 59 types and phases of Oriental character." 55LX¥II (July 21, 1898), 53- 5%. S., XXIX (May l1 *, 1898), 328. j 57pjal. XXV (August 1, 1898), 78. . 58Lmi (July 21, 1898), 53. | 59LXXXI (August 13, I898), 219- | kQ Several periodicals found fault with "The Return." The Spectator called it "a long-drawn study of conjugal incompatibility . . . only redeemed from tediousness by occasional vivid descriptive passages." The Literary World said: In one of the stories Mr. Conrad chooses London for his scene, and apparently Henry James for his model, and anything more dreary and sordid than his description of a discussion between husband and wife we have never read. Literature objected to the lengthening of the story that resulted from the description of the people in the railroad station. The entire episode, it objected, was not connected with the story. T. R. Sullivan offered the only favorable comment I have found on "The Return," Conrad's earliest fiction with a London setting. In some detail he stated: The fine original motive in "The Return" awakens absorbing interest, making the reader impatient with the microscopic details that encumber it, and making the reader press on hastily in eagerness to learn the end. A second reading becomes almost a necessity for calm consideration of these same details and their drift. Dialogue with its Incidental false notes is the weakest part of the story, which may be described as a pitiless study of two human hearts at variance, struggling desperately for a mutual ground of comprehension. "The Return" makes a distinct and lasting impression, . . . demonstrating again,. Conrad’s power to distinguish himself in an untried field. ^ Since reviews of Tales of Unrest were briefer than the earlier ones of The Nigger of the Narcissus, interest in particular features of the stories tended to be reduced proportionately. Conrad’s style, 60 LXXXI (August 13, 1898), 219. 6lXXXX (June 25, 1898), 20lf. 62II (April 30, 1898), 507. 63Book Buver. XVI (May, 1898), 351- _ ' 1,5 for example, was mentioned only in Literature, which magazine remarked, "He is a careful student of style." Conrad’s characterizations were commented upon both unfavorably and favorably. The Spectator said, "His stories still labour under the drawback. . . that his white men and women nine times out of ten cut but sorry figures alongside of the dignified, heroic, unhappy 6*5 Orientals that people his pages." ^ This complaint was repeated 66 in Literature. T. E. Sullivan, on the other hand, wrote that j 1 I Karain and Arsat (in "The Lagoon") were ^impressive, tragic figures, | retained by the mind involuntarily."^ I Comments on the tone of individual stories, although explicitly or implicitly admitting Conrad’s power, were somewhat unfavorable. ' The statement in the American Monthly Beview of Beviews that "An Outpost of Progress" and "The Idiots" were "enough to create a 1 nightmare in their sheer bald horror"^® was corroborated in T. B. I Sullivan’s statement that the same stories, "though masterly in I 69 ' execution, proved, as to subject, grim beyond endurance," and by the statement in the Spectator that "The Idiots" was "almost un- TO bearably sinister." ^11 (April 30, I898), 507. j 65LXXXI (August 13, 1898), 219. 66II (April 30, 1898), 507. ' ^Book Buyer, XVI (May, 1898), 351- 68XVIII (December, 1898), 729. ^Book Buyer, XVI (May, 1898), 351. T°LXXXI (August 13, I898), 219.______________ _________________ 50 In reviews of Tales of Unrest, as in those of The Nigger of the Narcissus earlier, Conrad was praised for his ability to create 71 atmosphere. Literature said, "Conrad has a sense of atmosphere," and T. R. Sullivan wrote, "With a single word he seems to conjure up wondrous effects of landscape, bringing them home to us, and making 72 them in all their strangeness, as real as any that we know." Other periodicals commented not only upon the enchantment of Conrad’s atmosphere but also upon the fusion of atmosphere with character. The Chatauquan, for example, called the stories "veritable pen pictures i t of mental agitations with very appropriate scenic surroundings in j 73 1 which the effect is suggested without any elaboration of detail." ; 7h This belief was restated in the Critic. ; The reviews of Tales of Unrest contained other matters of interest to the student of Conrad, matters which in their way might have been even more significant for the subsequent reception of his I writings than the praise accorded his latest book in most periodicals. The first of these was a statement, probably harmful in its effect, in the Spectator (much like its earlier prophecy that The Nigger of the Narcissus would not find favor with readers) regarding "the disproportion between Mr. Conrad’s genius and the impression his , 75 books have created on the public. ^ The second matter of interest : ?1II (April 30, 1898), 507. 72Book Buyer, XVI (May, 1898), 351- I 73xxvil (July, 1898), h28. j 7%. S., XXIX (May 1^, 1898), 328. 75lxxxI (August 13, 1898), 219. was the enlargement of the scope of one review, that of William L. Alden in the New York Times, to include an announcement that readers of Conrad could soon expect to see his serialized "Heart of Darkness” in book form. "From the little that I have read of his 'Heart of Darkness,' now appearing in Blackwood's," said Alden, "I am inclined to think it will mark a very decided advance."^ Unlike the statement in the Spectator, Alden's statement probably worked for Conrad's advantage in that it brought not-yet-published writings to the attention of American readers. Longer magazine articles appeared, which, not primarily devoted to the function of reviewing Tales of Unrest, were concerned with Conrad's literary progress in broader perspective. The first of these began with the statement, "Few writers have increased their reputations so much recently as Mr. Joseph Conrad, whose most recent book, 'Tales of Unrest,' has just been published in this country by Scribners." The writer of the article then mentioned that Conrad's previous book, The Nigger of the Narcissus, "had j received the commendation of Mr. Henley." This information he i I followed by a history of Conrad's literary career to date and by a j personal description of Conrad.7? I | A second article, in the Academy, which went beyond any I | criticism up to that time in praising the larger aspects of Conrad's | work, was occasioned by Conrad's having won that magazine's annual prize of fifty guineas for the best recent fiction. The writer of ^Supplement (May 6, 1899), P* 30b, 7^Book Buyer, XVI. (June ,_1§98) , 389p390j;______________________ 52 the article began by stating that Conrad had produced only four books to date, all of which had been "in the fullest sense of the word, written." He then credited Conrad with giving great evidence of i "patient elaboration of style, without, however, leaving any sense of elaborateness," with "blending his human beings and nature " and with "possessing the irony of the Greek tragic dramatists." He I further stated: It is to Mr. Conrad’s achievement to have brought the East to our very doors, not only its people. . .but its feeling, its glamour, its beauty and wonder. His aloofness is Turgenev's. i But his poetry, his outlook on life, his artistic conscience— these are his o w n . j Among articles on Conrad which appeared during these years, one j was important in Conrad criticism because it marked the first i i published appreciation of Conrad by one of his friends. This article, by Edward Garnett, was notable also because in it Garnett attempted to define at length the quality of Conrad's work as a writer. "This faculty of seeing man's life in relation to the seen and unseen forces of nature it is that gives Mr. Conrad's art its extreme delicacy and its great breadth of vision," he said. As a j fine example of this quality he submitted The Nigger of the Narcissus, saying: "The Nigger of the Narcissus" is masterly not merely because \ the whole illusion of the sailor's life is reproduced before j our eyes, with the crew's individual and collective attitude towards one another and their officers, with the daily round j of hardship, peril, and love for their ship; but because the , ship is seen as a separate thing of life, with a past and a j destiny, floating in the midst of the immense, mysterious j universe around it; and the whole shifting atmosphere of the ^"Joseph Conrad," Academy, LVI (January lk, 1899)* 66-67. 53 sea, the horizon, the heavens, is felt by the senses as mysteriously near us, yet mysteriously aloof from the human life battling against it.79 Edward Garnett was not the only member of the Garnett family, however, who praised Conrad's work in The Nigger of the Narcissus. As appreciations of the latest writings were made to Conrad by admirers of the earlier books, Constance Garnett (in gratitude for Conrad's dedication of that novel to her husband) wrote: I have been reading the "Nigger," parts of which I saw as it appeared in the "New Review." Two things have struck me ; particularly in it,--its extraordinary reality and the great , beauty of your style. A letter of yours which Edward showed ! me lately has been the warmest and most appreciative praise I for my Tourguenev, and frankly I feel the praise from you who have such mastery of language is worth the praise of forty ; English r e v i e w e r s | John Galsworthy followed Conrad's career with interest. He ! wrote Conrad that The Nigger of the Narcissus was "in great request" Qn at his club, the Junior Carlton. E. V. Lucas wrote Conrad: j I want to send you just a line to say thank you for your new story. The sea-nature and the human nature are at once so rare and so welcome: and that such a slight episode can be made as enthralling and memorable as you have made it, is j to me miraculous. It should kill the pasteboard ocean | forever Arthur Symons, in an article on D'Annunzio for the Saturday Review remarked parenthetically that two English authors, Conrad and Kipling, I had demonstrated "great ability of a narrative kind." As evidence ^"Mr. Joseph Conrad." Academy. LV (October 15, 1898), 83. f t f * Letter from Constance Garnett, in Twenty Letters. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 119. ®2Letter from E. V. Lucas, dated January 10, 1898, in Twenty Letters. that Conrad possessed this "great ability," he offered his readers The Nigger of the Narcissus, which he found to be "an almost endless description of the whole movement, noise, order, and distraction of a ship and a ship’s company during a storm, bringing to one’s memory all the discomforts one has ever endured upon the sea." New admirers of Conrad also appeared. Sir Hugh Clifford, after reading An Outcast of the Islands some time in 1898 and after having his own Studies in Brown Humanity reviewed by Conrad, wrote Conrad I a letter (now lost), suggesting that the two men meet. Clifford's praise of Conrad's writing must have been high, for Conrad wrote him on May 17, 1898, j I appreciate the more the kind things you say in your letter , because I suspect my assumption of Malay colouring for my fic tion must be exasperating to those who know. It seems as though 1 you had found in my prose some reason for forgiving me. Nothing could be more flattering to a scribbler’s vanity or more sooth- 1 ing to the conscience of a man who, even in his fiction, tries J to be tolerably true.^4 - : At the meeting of the two men Clifford’s praise to Conrad must have been even greater because Conrad later said: I was naturally delighted to see him and infinitely gratified j by the kind things he found to say about my first books and ' some of my early short stories. ... I remember that he said many things that ought to have made me blush to the roots of i my hair. 5 i Through the agency of H. G. Wells, Arnold Bennett also became a \ 1 1 ! Qo JLXXXV (January 29, 1898), lk6. j ^Life and Letters. I, 237. ! Joseph Conrad, Preface to A Personal Record. Canterbury I Edition (New York: Doubleday, Page and Co., 1924), p. vi. Clifford’s . own account of the meeting, which corroborates Conrad's, is given in ‘ his essay on An Outcast of the Islands in A Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating (New York: Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1929), p. 21. belated but enthusiastic reader of Conrad's earlier books. Wells later said of a letter Bennett wrote him late in 1897: He /5ennett7 thanks me for telling him of Conrad. He had missed Almayer's Folly in a batch of other novels for his paper and I had discovered it. That was one up for me. Wow under my injunction he is rejoicing over The Higger of the Narcissus. "Where did the man pick up that style and that synthetic way of gathering up a general impression and flinging it at you? . . . He is so consciously an artist.1 '®® Another reader whose admiration of Conrad's writings brought about a lifelong friendship with Conrad was Robert Bontine Cunninghame Graham. In August, 1897, Graham wrote Conrad his praise of "An Outpost of Progress," which he had read in Cosmopolis. Although j Conrad seems subsequently to have destroyed his letter, like the I earlier letter of Clifford regarding An Outcast of the Islands it 1 must have contained high praise, because Conrad wrote in reply: You've given me a few moments of real, solid excitement. ... { I feel distinctly richer this morning. I admire so much your i expression that your commendation has for me a very high value, — the very highest1 Believe that I appreciate fully the kind impulse that prompted you to write.®'? Graham's admiration seems to have been expressed at even greater length in the months that followed. On January 6th of the following j 1 year Conrad wrote Garnett that he was "in intimate correspondence" ^Experiments in Autobiography (New York: Macmillan, 193^ ) , p. 5331 ^Life and letters, I, 208. When the two men met later, Conrad wrote in a copy of Graham's Mogreb-El-Acksa: "'Outpost of Progress,' Cosmopolis, June, 1897. Story of an outpost of progress told with out heroics and without spreadeaglism, and true to life; therefore unpopular, if indeed, like most other artistic things, it has not passed like a 'sheep in the night.'" Herbert Faulkner West, A Modern Conquistador: Robert Bontine Cunninghame Graham. His Life and Works (London: Cranley and Day, 1932), p. IQS. 56 I with Graham. "He writes to me every week once or even, twice," said 88 Conrad. "He is struck." Nine days later Conrad wrote Garnett that Graham had said he would like to have reviewed The Nigger of the Narcissus and was writing to Frank Harris, editor of the Saturday j Review,to get him to publish some of Conrad’s writings. He was | ! still trying to get Harris to publish Conrad's writings a few weeks 1 later, at which time Conrad wrote Garnett, "Harris keeps quiet like Qq a man in hiding. Graham blasphemes and curses." \ During this time also, The Nigger of the Narcissus brought 1 Conrad's work to the attention of William Ernest Henley, a fact of [which Conrad was in later years very proud. As early as 1895 he i ■ had tried unsuccessfully through his publisher T. Fisher Unwin to ! interest Henley in Almayer's Folly, probably for the purpose of getting him to buy the serial rights to some later work. Conrad I ^ [wrote to Garnett, May 1, 1895J Called on F^isher] u/nwin/ who says Henley can't read more | than 60 pages of the immortal work— after which he "lays it ! down." Despair and red herrings! Suicide by thirst on | Henley's doorstep. ...90 ; But with The Nigger of the Narcissus Conrad' s efforts to interest Henley in his work were at last successful. He wrote William ! Blackwood, November 9, 1897, "Mr. William Heinemann took me up and : introduced my work to Mr. Henley% and it was its good fortune to I ! I j please that remarkable man. In that way I secured admission to the | G O Letters from Conrad, p. 117- ^Letters from Conrad, p. 122. 90Letters from Conrad, p. 7* pages of the New Review. There is unfortunately no evidence that Conrad himself ever met Henley; nor is there extant any record of just what Henley had to say about Conrad's work. To Conrad, though, the very fact of acceptance meant much. He wrote to Garnett, November J, 1898, "I send you here Henley's letter on the matter. I 92 feel hopeful about my own work. Completely changed.' After its appearance, The Nigger of the Narcissus also won for Conrad the praise of both Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch and Stephen Crane The former, whose favorable review has already been considered above (see above, p. 37)* wrote Conrad the following lines even 'before his review appeared: Will you let me congratulate you on your "Nigger of the Narcissus" or, at any rate thank you for the pleasure it gave me? 1 ! I tried it promptly upon an expert seaman of my acquaintance, and we agree it is a book. And I have tried to say this in a causerie I’ve been scribbling for the Pall Mall Magazine: though that doesn't amount to much, and won't appear before the middle of February.93 Conrad later wrote to Garnett that Quiller-Couch had assured him that "the book must be a success" and had called it "truthful and ^heroic. ^J. H. Robertson, W. E. Henley. (London: Constable, 19^9), p. 323. ! from Conrad, p. 1^2. Judging from the habits of the two men, Conrad and Garnett, it seems likely that Garnett must have sent Henley’s letter back to Conrad, who later destroyed it. Had Garnett kept it, it would probably have been published later. 1 93^ Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating (New York: 'Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1929), p. 39. 1 ^Letters from Conrad, p. 112. 58 Stephen Crane, after reading The Nigger of the Narcissus, wrote 95 to Hamlin Garland, "It is a crackerjack." To Conrad himself he wrote: i The story is too good, too terrible. I wanted to forget it a once. It caught me very hard. I felt ill over that red thread j lining from the corner of the man’s mouth to his chin. It was frightful with the weight of a real and present death. By such small means does the real writer suddenly flash out in the sky ; above those who are always doing rather well.9° Upon his arrival in England, Crane made a point of getting Sydney Pawling, an associate of Conrad's publisher Heinemann, to introduce him to C o n r a d . After meeting Conrad, his enthusiasm for the man equaled his earlier enthusiasm for Conrad's writing. Crane's t ; biographer, John Berryman, says that he spoke of Conrad to Huneker later in Hew York "as if he were the Bjlesse&j V/irgin7 M j a r £ j j I In the less than two years of life that remained to Crane after ! I | the two met, October 15, 1897, Conrad and Crane frequently exchanged ' family visits, each lasting several days. A later story by Hamlin Garland has it that the two of them worked side by side in Crane' s study in Brede Place.99 There is also evidence that during one of (Crane's visits to Conrad the two men talked about collaborating on a ; play.10' " * Although we have no public statement of Crane's appreciation I 95j0hn Berryman, Stephen Crane (Hew York: William Sloane ■ (Associates, 1950), p. 200. 9^Letter from Crane, dated November 11, 1899, in Twenty Letters, j 9?Berryman, p. 220. j 9®Berryman, p. 221. i 99Hamlin Garland, My Friendly Contemporaries, a Literary Log (New York: The Macmillan Company, 19^2), p. 499• lOODetailed accounts of this are given in both Berryman, p. 207, and in Letters from Conrad_p.L xvi. _______________________________ 59 ioi of Conrad, Crane showed his concern for Conrad’s weXfare as a writer in a , note he dictated to his friend Sanford Bennett in ApriX, X900, shortXy Before his death: My condition is probabXy known to yon. I have Conrad on my mind very much just now. Garnett does not think it Xikely that his writing wiXX ever be popular outside the ring of men who write. He is poor and a gentXeman and proud. His wife is not strong and they have a kid. If Garnett should ask you to help pull wires for a place on the Civil List for Conrad please do the last favor. ... I am sure you will.'1 ' 02 In summary, it is clear that The Nigger of the Narcissus was favorably received in reviews. Although some periodicals were adversely critical of particular features such as style and characterization, such criticisms usually accompanied expressions of 'approval of Conrad's writing generally. Above all, Conrad was regarded in many periodicals as a superb creator of atmosphere. A few of them, moreover, stated that Conrad brought his atmosphere into j iorganic fusion with his characterizations. I have found only one 1 review, that in the Academy, which was more unfavorable than favorable to this book. With Tales of Unrest Conrad's reputation suffered a slight ! decline since several reviewers expressed only qualified approval of his work. Although briefer than those of The Nigger of the ! Conrad wrote Garnett, January 15> 1898, "/Crane7 says he has written about me, but where he says not." Letters from Conrad, p. 119. Conrad, on the other hand, wrote fairly extensive appreciations of Crane. For these see his Some Berniniscences. (London: Nash, 1912), pp. 181-182; his Preface to Thomas Beer's Stephen Crane (London: Heinemann, 1924); and his "Stephen Crane," in Last Essays (London: Dent, 1926.) 102Berryman, p. 294. Narcissus, the reviews of Tales of Unrest did include some attention both to the artistic merit of individual stories and to special features of Conrad*s method in all the stories. These stories, except for "Hie Return," were favorably fudged. Periodicals usually l praised Conrad for particular features of method in Tales of Unrest. I much as they had in reviews of The Nigger of the Narcissus. His ability to characterize was questioned in some periodicals, his ability to create atmosphere was praised in nearly all of them, and his ability to combine the two effectively was observed in a few of I I them. j I Comments on the melancholy tone of two of the stories in Tales ; of Unrest ("The Idiots" and "An Outpost of Progress") may have been | enough to discomfit possible readers of later books who would not like their fiction "grim beyond endurance," "enough to create a nightmare" I in its "sheer bald horror," or almost "unbearably sinister." Although^ it is difficult to estimate the effect of such statements, it seems likely that they did not work to Conrad's advantage. The suggestion in the Spectator that The Nigger of the Narcissus, though a fine j work, would not prove popular, and the later suggestion, again in the Spectator, that in Tales of Unrest there was a "disproportion between Mr. Conrad's genius and the impression his books have created * on the public,” were probably no less harmful to Conrad's reputation. Other occurrences during the years 1897 to 1899 were probably helpful to his reputation with later readers. The broadening of scope of the New York Times review to an interest in Conrad titles i not yet in book form and the three articles on Conrad which went I 6l "beyond the review function to a consideration of the growth of Conrad as a writer marked a new and favorable phase in Conrad’s reception. More important still in Conrad reception, however, was the admiration of Conrad’s work by literary figures like Edward Garnett, Constance Garnett, John Galsworthy, E. V. Lucas, and Arthur Symons, and the attraction to his writings of new admirers like Sir Hugh Clifford, i Arnold Bennett, R. B. Cunninghame Graham, William Ernest Henley, Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, and Stephen Crane. CHAPTER III RECEPTION OF LORD JIM, YOUTH, AND TYPHOON AND OTHER STORIES Lord Jim is the story of a young English mate who deserts his ship and leaves its passengers to sink with it. After the ship is saved and his cowardice is discovered, he exiles himself among Malay tribesmen and finally makes a grand atonement by allowing himself to be killed by a tribal chieftain. The novel was highly praised in British periodicals when it appeared in book form late in 1900. The Athenaeum said, "Clever as Mr. Joseph Conrad's work has always been, 1 he has written nothing so good as Lord Jim. ... It is written by „1 a remarkable hand, and it is a story that well deserves to live. The Academy called it "a searching study--prosecuted with patience i 2 ■ and understanding--of the cowardice of a man who was not a coward. i I The Speaker said: * Many prophecies, extravagant we thought at the time, were made with regard to the author of The Nigger of the Narcissus. Those prophecies have been more than fulfilled in Lord Jim, which is a very remarkable and interesting book.3 1 And with equal enthusiasm the Spectator declared, "We have no hesitation in pronouncing Mr. Conrad's Lord Jim to be the most original, remarkable, and engrossing novel of a season by no means 1 ■unfruitful of excellent fiction." 1 (November 3, 1900), pt. 2, p. kk3. 2LIX (November 10, 1900), kk3. 3n . S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 21^. ^LXXXV (November 2k, 1900), 753. 63 Lord Jim was also praised in American periodicals. The New York Tribune said: If Mr. Conrad’s new story excited admiration as it appeared serially in the pages of Blackwood’s Magazine, it exacts a double tribute from the reader now that it is pub lished in book form.5 In an early note in the New York Times, William L. Alden wrote, "Those who have read the story /Lord Jim7 in Blackwood * s know that it will rank with ’The Nigger of the Narcissus,' if not above it." Three weeks later, in a review in the same newspaper, Alden called I it "a great book, a wonderful book, a magnificent book"— in fact, , s a book he did not dare to praise as it deserved "for fear people 7 ! would accuse him of falling into the deepest mire of gush." The 1 i Outlook said, "Subtlety of character-study and imaginative delicacy j of touch make this romance vastly superior to the average fiction- Q product of the year." The Bookman said, "Half of its length could have been sacrificed, yet judged as a document, it must be acknowledged' t * . „9 i j a masterpiece. j Only two reviews were not positively favorable. In the Book i Buyer, A. Schade Van Westrum, non-committal about the literary j ! merits of the book, stated only that Conrad shared with Louis Becke "a monopoly of the romance of the Malaysian island world, that ! j : | ^Supplement (November 3, 1900), p. 10. | ^Supplement (November 10, 1900), p. 770. ^Supplement (December 1, 1900), p. 836. ' 8 LXVI (November 17, 1900), 7H. 9XIII (April, 1901), I87. j ............ 6k last refuge of the flotsam and jetsam of the white race. The Critic, somewhat more critical, said: Imagine a fat, furry spider with green head and shining points for eyes, busily at work, some dewy morning, on a marvellous web,— and you have the plot of "Lord Jim." It spins itself away, out of nothing, with side tracks leading apparently, nowhere, and cross tracks that start back and begin anew and end once more— sometimes on the verge of no where, and sometimes in the centre of the plot itself:— and all with an air of irresponsible intentness and a businesslike run at the end that sets the structure trembling on gossamer threads. Comments on particular features of method were nearly all favorable too. Only Conrad's style was adversely criticized. The Speaker complained, for example, "Mr. Conrad’s style still seems to 1 12 j suffer something from lack of simplicity." Similar adverse 12 14 comments were ma.de in the New York Times and in the Athenaeum. Opposed to such comments were those in the Spectator, which praised I 15 j Conrad’s "restrained yet fervid eloquence of style." The characterization in Lord Jim was praised in many periodicals. i ! The Speaker said, "In its way Lord Jim is a psychological study as I ' ' , ’ 1 " " „16 ! profound, if not as Illuminating, as any of Meredith's, and the j i | j ^^XXII (February, 1901), 63. I 1:LXXXVIII (May, 1901), ^37. 1 12N. S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 216. Supplement (December 1, 1900), p. 836. -^(November 3> 1900) pt. 2, p. 576. 15LXXXV (November 2k, 1900), 753. l6N. S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 215. Spectator spoke of "the subtlety of psychological analysis" in the novel. Other periodicals, devoting their attention to only one 4 important aspect of characterization, commented on how effectively i Conrad focused the readerfe attention on Lord Jim, the central figure of the novel. The Academy said: Jim is always the subject, . . . and there are these notable men— Brown and Stein, Brierley and Brierly's mate, the German captain and the Swedish chandler, Cornelius Doramin, Jewel and Tamb* Itam, and more than all, Marlow. And yet, 1 though so fully drawn, they have a place in the book only i solely by virtue of their relation to Jim.^° 19 ' Similar statements appeared in Alden's review in the New York Times 20 I and in the Outlook review. Most periodicals were too general in their comments on characterization to make the point that the subject of the book, the attempt to prove courage after demonstrating cowardice, was developed j within the characterization of Lord Jim. Speaker. one of the few that commented on this point, said: Jim has not the habit of courage, and on an occasion when the eye of the others was not upon him and the example of others ; was in favour of cowardice, he neglects his clear duty and shows himself a coward, thereby losing his honour. ... Unable to get any encouragement in his attempt to believe that he was not really a coward, he searches for an attempt to disprove it 17KXXV (November 2k, 1900), 753. l8LIX (November 10, 1900), - “ ^supplement (December 1, 1900), p. 836. ' 20 LXVI (November 17, 1900), 711. 21N. S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 215-216. ! The New York Tribune recognized in the novel an even larger or threefold unity (of theme, character development, and atmosphere), when it said: Mr. Conrad deals with a coward, and he is mercilessly direct in his exposition of the man's most fugitive emotions, but over every page there is flung the indescribable romance of the immemorial East.22 Atmosphere, as a feature of Conrad's method, was again commented on favorably. The Outlook, concerned with this feature alone, said that the novel had "a wonderfully fascinating air of romance of the ! 23 1 sea and of the mystery of the Orient.” The Academy, perceiving I Conrad’s interrelation of atmosphere and character portrayal said: i 1 | Conrad omits nothing in Jim's favour or disfavour and 1 reproduces every shaft of light that played upon Jim from all sides. He gives us the bizarre setting of the drama: the mysterious Eastern port with its natives, its captains ' and later its traders; and later, the inner life of the tiny 1 state in the Malay Peninsula where Jim worked out his salva- / tion— all done with a poetical, romantic, half-wistful air : for which we go in vain to any other English writer.2^- I Also commented upon in detail was the narrative method Conrad employed in his thorough probing of Lord Jim's struggle with his 1 I i conscience. Some writers were concerned about the lengthening of ! the novel that resulted from Conrad's probing rather than whether J or not the method was effective. W. L. Alden, in his early notice i ! in the New York Times, for example, said that the book "would I prescribe its own length and Mr. Conrad was powerless to shorten | ^Supplement (November 3, 1900), p. 10 23IXVI (November 17, 1900), 711. 2lfLIX (November 10, 1900), 443. i 67 it."2' ' ’ Alden1 s opinion vas corroborated in the New York Tribune,28 but opposed in the Bookman, where it was maintained that Conrad's method caused the book to become too long (see above, p. 63). Marlow, whose detailed characterization contributed to lengthening the novel, received this favorable appraisal from the New York Tribune: The man Marlow muses like an oracle. He seems to stand immobile before us; there is a gesture now and then; occasionally he shifts position; often he pauses, relapses into silence, then picks up the narrative as though it were an effort to detach himself from the myriad memories that come swarming back upon him. Conrad’s use of Marlow as his narrator was also believed to be effective, for the Tribune said of Marlow’s narration: It is all a record of little truths; it is a mosaic, formed with zealous solicitude for justice, of the thousand and one facts, emotions, shades of emotion, which in the long run go to render Jim comprehensible, explain his conduct and make him j intensely interesting.2^ 1 : Conrad's use of Marlow as narrator was also commented upon favorably in the Speaker.28 Against such favorable comments, the objections in the Academy j that the style of the novel was "not that of the oral story-teller" ■ and that "the story would take about eleven hours to tell" appear 1 < trifling. Indeed, the Academy itself admitted, "These, after all, I are nothings. . . . Lord Jim is too fine for such spots to injure ^Supplement (November 10, 1900), p. 770. Supplement (November 3, 1900), p. 10. ^Supplement (November 3, 1900), p. 10. 28N. S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 215. its beauty."^ Although most periodicals commented favorably on the book as a whole or upon particular features of Conrad’s method, many made prophecies that Lord Jim would have only a limited number of readers. I The Critic said, "If he keeps on writing the same sort of story, he may arrive at the unique distinction of having few readers in his 30 own generation, and a fair chance of several in the next." The Spectator said that the novel was too detached from "actuality," which it defined as "topical allusions, political personalities of the mundanities of the Mayfair," to please "the great and influential 31 section of readers." The Outlook objected, "Lord Jim may not j t I reach a great popularity, for its qualities are of a peculiarly j i refined and half-elusive kind which may well prove unattainable by op 33 the multitude. " ' 3 Similar statements appeared in the Athenaeum. the o l j . ' Bookman, and the Hew York Tribune.35 Among such statements, that t "r~r™~~1 1 ’ J ! in the Athenaeum was probably most harmful to Conrad’s future j reputation, because it ascribed the difficulty of reading Lord Jim to Conrad’s use of the narrator Marlow, a device which was to become j t 2%»IX (november 10, 1900), 4^3* 30xmriII (May, 1901), it-38. , 31LXXV (November 2k, 1900), 753. ( 32LKVI (November 17, 1900), 711. ! i 33(Noveniber 3^ 1900), pt. 2, p. 576. j 3S[III (April, 1901), 187. 3^Supplement, (November 3, 1900), p. 10. j 69 an important feature of Conrad's method. Conrad’s next hook was a volume containing three stories. "Youth," the first story and the one which gave its name to the i volume, presented Marlow to Conrad's readers as a young seaman who ; I made a voyage from England to the Orient on a ship plagued hy had luck. Because of the spirit of youth in which the narrator viewed the events of the story, however, the ill-fated voyage became a I triumphal one. "The Heart of Darkness," the second story, recounted j i ' Marlow’s experiences as captain of a small trading vessel on the Congo, where he witnessed the demoralization of a European ivory trader who died after learning of the darkness of his own soul. "The End of the Tether," the final story in the volume, was an f account of an English sea captain who sacrificed himself and his ! honor as a seaman to provide a living for a daughter who never J realized the magnitude of his sacrifice. ! Comments upon Youth, whether upon the whole volume or upon the individual stories, were favorable. The New York Times said, "The i adventures Conrad describes, though laid among scenes wholly alien j | 1 to commonplace life, are wrought into a tissue of truth so firm and 1 tough as to resist the keenest skepticism." The Independent said, , ■ "Conrad writes books of the sea that interpret themselves to per- ' i 1 fection to the veriest land lubber of us all with not a word of ^7 I idiom to bless himself with."-*' John Masefield praised Youth highly j 36supplement (April 1903), P* 22k. 37lV (April 2, 1903), 801. in his review in the Speaker, but not before he had stated his reservations as follows: Mr. Conrad’s stories, excellent though they are, leave always a feeling of disappointment, almost of regret. His rare temperament, an exotic, a poetic temperament, and its artistic expression, though tense, nervous, trembling after beauty, is always a little elusive, a little alien, of the quality of fine gum from Persia, or of a precious silk from Ghilian. . . . His manner, indeed, shows a tendency towards the "precious,’ ' towards the making of a fine phrase and polishing of perfect lines. He then declared, "In this volume Mr. Conrad gives us three stories, and each shows a notable advance upon the technique and matter of qQ his former work." Notable among comments on the whole volume were those in the Nation: In Conrad's early works there was little to indicate that he had any profound reason for writing fiction other than that suggest ed by the chance of first-hand acquaintance with scenes lying j out of the beaten path of travel and people born or banished I beyond the reach of social or moral law. Gradually, however, he has shown himself to be one of nature's licensed story tellers, holding a warrant to explore the heart of life and to discover some of its mystery and pain. . . . His latest volume, entitled "Youth," places him unmistakably among the j best, imaginative writers of his period.39 I | These comments in the Nation were notable because they indicated a . I ! reversal of position by a periodical which had been unfavorable to I I Conrad’s earliest writings. ; Some reviews, if not expressly of one story in the volume, were j inclined to treat one story to the exclusion of the others. In the New York Times William L. Alden, for example, wrote two reviews of 38N. S., VII (January 31, 1903), kk2 39i^XXVI (June 11, 1903), ^78. 71 "The Heart of Darkness” when that story was appearing in Blackwood1s Magazine and a later one of the whole volume in which he emphasized the first story, "Youth.” In his first review of "The Heart of Darkness" he stated that Wells had "found it one of the few stories of the Victorian era which had survived until ’the sleeper woke In his next, he said, "The other day I read Conrad's 'Heart of Darkness.' Good Heavens I How that man can writeI . . . There is In little story to it, but how it grips and holds onei" Ho less enthusiastic was Alden's praise of "Youth” when he later commented upon the volume to which that story gave its name. "That one story is sufficient to place him with the foremost writers of fiction in j | any language," he said. * 1 - 2 i The preference for "Youth" was also noticeable in other j periodicals. In a review of the volume, the New York Tribune commented only upon "Youth," which it said "proved, as ’The Children of the Sea1 proved, that one of the most difficult and fascinating of , I 4 . 3 themes" had "found one more brilliant new master." Preference for kk 45 "Youth" was also apparent in the Header, and in the Independent. I ^ John Masefield also regarded "Youth" as the best story in the volume. j ■ 1 ^°(June 17. 1899), p. 388. (I have not been able to find the I , source of Wells' statement.; j t ; (March 3, 1900), p. 138. , ^%Jew York Times Supplement (December 3, 1902), p. 898. ^Supplement (September 18, 1898), p. 12. **I (May, 1903), 561-62. ; ^5LV (April 2, 1903), 802. ___________________________________ 72 "’Youth' is, without doubt, the best thing Mr. Conrad has done," he said. "Tales of just that quality are rare, and the book should establish Mr. Conrad in the high position he already holds, even if it should fail to add to his laurels."^ So strong was the preference for "Youth" that the other stories of the volume were appraised chiefly in comparison with it. The Nation and the New York Times were exceptional, however, in treating each story independently. The first spoke of "Youth" as "the literal account of disaster and failure that becomes a lyrical expression of the hope and courage and joy of youth." "The Heart of Darkness" it called "a dreadful and fascinating tale, as full as i i any of Poe's of mystery and haunting terrors, yet with a substantial I ! t basis of reality." "The End of the Tether" it lauded for its ' | "repression of the sentimental attitude" in the account of Captain | Whalley "facing with fortitude and equanimity disaster after disaster,! I until he came to 'the end of the tether* and went down with his ! kl 1 ship." The New York Times, in what was anomalous among judgments j ; | of reviewers, named "The End of the Tether" the finest story in the ! 1 volume. It was superior to the other two stories, it maintained, "in | dramatic power, in the portrayal of the various characters that ■ dovetail with each other in similar experience, and in the portrayal j k& 1 of an important and exquisite type." I ^Speaker, N. S., VIII (January 31, 1903), ^2. ^LXXXVI (June 11, 1903), kjQ. ^Supplement (April 4, 190k), p. 22k. 73 Because he rightly believed that "The Heart of Darkness" would be less well understood than either of the other stories, Edward Garnett undertook in his review in the A cadency to "analyze" the story. "The art of ‘The Heart of Darkness,*" he said, "implies catching the infinite shades of the white man’s uneasy, disconcerted, and fantastic relations with the exploited barbarism of Africa." The story, he felt, implied "the acutest analysis of the deterioration of the white man's morale, when. . . planted down in the tropics as an ’emissary of light' to make trade profits out of 'subject i i I races.'" He spoke with pride of Conrad’s "masterly analysis of the | ! abysmal gulf between the white man’s system and the black man's j comprehension of its results," and he recognized the fact that Conrad, j as the writer of the story, did not stand with the white man on one j side of the gulf he described so well. "The story is simply a piece j of art, fascinating and remorseless," he said, "and the artist is ! jbut intent on presenting his sensations in that sequence and i arrangement whereby the meaning or the meaninglessness of the white man in uncivilized Africa can be felt in all its aspects. ! Although Garnett believed "The End of the Tether" to be "less j subtle in arrangement, less inevitable in its climax than 'Heart ;of Darkness,'" he said: ■ If we are to judge the story, however, as a series of i continuous and interdependent pictures of life, cunning i mirages of actual scenes, exquisitely balanced and propor tioned, delicate mirages evoked as by an enchanter's wand, then indeed Mr. Conrad is easily among the first writers of ^LKIII (December 6, 1902), 606. ■ tT! today. "The End of the Tether" is a triumph of the writer’s art of description, hut we must repeat that "Heart of Darkness" in the subtlety of its criticism of life is the high-water mark of the author’s talent.50 Garnett's belief that "The Heart of Darkness" might require j | some kind of explication is probably sufficient reason why the j other stories in the volume were usually preferred to it. A very positive reason for the preference of many reviewers for "Youth" iprobably lay in the lyrical spirit of the story and the way Conrad was able to create believable atmosphere, at once both real and romantic. The New York Tribune paid tribute to the spirit of the story when it said of Marlow': The illusion of youth was upon him, yet his eyes were wide ! open, and he conveys as he talks exactly the impression that is most enchanting— the impression of actual life and radiant romance. It is an impression with nothing complicated about ■ it, but it is beyond definition.51 j ! 52 53 !The Nation and the Independent contained similar statements in praise of the atmosphere in "Youth." Many periodicals, as a matter iof fact, praised Conrad for the atmosphere— and the characterization as well— of all three stories in the volume. The New York Times said: i The author’s exceptional power is manifest in two directions: 1 in his ability to portray extraordinary scenery and in his ability tp impress a character upon the credulity of his | readers.5a iThe Athenaeum mentioned "the careful analysis, the philosophical . — i ) 5QAcademy, 1XIII (December 6, 1902), 607-608. 51supplement (September 18, 1898), p. 12. 52LKXVI (June 11, 1903), Vf8. 53lv (April 2, 1903), 801. ^Supplement (April k, 1903), P« 22k, ___________________ 75 presentation of phases of human character," and added: But he has another gift of which he himself may be less conscious. . . . That is the gift of conveying atmosphere. .... After turning the last page of one of his books, we rise saturated by the very air they breathed.55 Adverse comments on style, quite frequent in reviews of earlier books, were rare in those of Youth. The New York Times mentioned an occasional "patch of wordy underbrush," in Conrad’s stories but maintained that there was always sufficient interest to "lure one through to the welcome clearing" where events could "be plainly j seen."^ The Nation praised Conrad for his "power of expression so | fluent and intense" that it often ran "to prodigality."^ The |Athenaeum said of Conrad, "He has the true worker's eye, the true j artist’s pitilessness, in the detection and elimination of the redundant word, the idle thought, the insincere idiom, or even for 58 the mark of punctuation misplaced," The four stories ("Typhoon," "Amy Foster," "Falk," and "To morrow") that comprised the volume published in England in 1903 as Typhoon and Other Stories appeared in the United States in two separate volumes. The first, Typhoon, appeared in 1902; the second, 1 Falk, appeared after the English volume in 1903 and contained all the stories in it except "Typhoon." Because Conrad in this way achieved publication of three books, rather than two, it seems 55(December 20, 1902), pt. 2, p. 82k. 5^Supplement (April k, 1903), P* 22k. 57LXXXVI (June 11, 1903), W . ■ (December 20, 1902), pt. 2, p. 82k. ~76~] likely that his reputation was somewhat helped. At any rate, the three hooks probably occasioned more comments upon his work than only two would have done. "Typhoon” was a story of an unimaginative English sea-captain who doggedly sailed his ship directly through a violent storm in t the China Sea. "Amy Foster" was an account of the unhappy life of ' I an Eastern European who was forced by a shipwreck to live among j English country people who treated him as an alien. "Falk" was a j searching study of the effect of having been a cannibal on a Danish ' j seaman who must later confess his crime to a woman he wishes to marry. ; "To-morrow," a story which was successfully dramatized, was an , account of the return home of a son whose father refused to believe that the day he had so long awaited had actually arrived. | Upon its appearance in the United States late in 1902 as a I separate book, Typhoon received immediate acclaim. The New York i i 1 Tribune said, "'Typhoon* is one of those books that only too seldom I jfall into the hands of a reviewer, a book so good that to read it is t i 59 ! ia peculiar pleasure, to praise it is a peculiar privilege." The Reader said, "A more interesting sea sketch than 'Typhoon* we have 60 never known. Of its kind it comes very close to perfection. Harper's Weekly said, "Typhoon has more 'bowels' in it than the | J entire product of half a dozen English novelists whose popularity ! „6l ' Mr. Conrad can scarcely be said to equal. The New York Times ^Supplement (September 14, 1902), p. 12. ; ^°I (December, 1902), 101. j 6lXLVI (October>, 1902) , 11+12. ________ ___________________ 77 concluded, "It is not nautical men alone who will appreciate Mr. Conrad's thorough acquaintance with the ship, hut his treatment 62 of the entire subject is one which appeals to a general public." The Forum, in a somewhat less favorable review than others, said, "Conrad is one of the greatest craftsmen in fiction today. How great an artist he is can be decided only when his peculiar kind of impressionism has had a long test."^ Reviews of Typhoon and Other Stories were no less laudatory than those of Typhoon. The Athenaeum, with particular reference to ! "Typhoon," said, "Anything more thorough and convincing of its kind j we have never read. .. . Mr, Conrad thinks in pictures; he forces | 1 his reader, willingly enough, to be sure— to see in pictures, and j „6k these most real and vivid. The Academy said; In our time the cult of the sea has changed the tone of its interpreters. . . . They have seen with a more subjective eye and realized the inner meanings of power in relation to 1 individual temperament. The first of the new school, perhaps, was Herman Melville, who is still, in his particular way, unapproached; but he did not bring to his subject the creative imagination which we find, say, in the work of Mr. Kipling and Mr. Conrad.85 , 1 Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, concerned with the effect of Conrad's latest ’ I ^ book on his reputation, wrote in the London Bookman: | The book as a whole proves amply that Mr. Conrad is not, as j ’ some feared, a worker on a vein of ore that may run thin and ! 1 ' ; ! I | ^Supplement (September 20, 1902), p. 626. 63xxXIV (January, 1903), ^00. ^(May 2, 1903), pt. 1, p. 558. ; 65LXIV (May 9, 1903), ^63. 78 disappear; that romance with him is rather a spring running fresh and strong, and able to fill as many buckets as time may allow to be brought to it. He has too fine a conscience to permit the buckets to be brought up too fast.86 Falk, when published in the United States in 1903, attracted Hess attention than the earlier Typhoon had done, and suffered somewhat from comparison with the earlier volume. The New York Times, I for example, called it not so sustained and ambitious an effort as •Lord Jim,1 not so artistic as ’Youth,’ not so thrilling as ’Typhoon,’ , not so deeply and truly emotional as 'The End of the Road’ JslcJ"i 1 but-declared: All the originality and promise of those marvelously good ! stories is more than continued and in a new way, showing a j versatility and fertility of imagination that foretell better I things in the future from this author.87 j I 1 iFrederic Taber Cooper, in the Bookman, said of the stories in Falk, , ,"They do not have anything like the power of his last year’s volume, j i Jyet they all bear the stamp of characteristic and rather grim ! seriousness."^ The New York Tribune, on the other hand, appraised the stories without reference to the earlier volume. "The three istories brought together in Mr. Conrad's latest volume are character- ! i istic of his original talent," it said. "They all have an atmosphere ; which is tragic not so much because of the incidents narrated, but i ; because of the author’s way of enveloping everything that he has to I i I 88xxiv (June, 1903), 109. ^Supplement (October 2b, 1903‘ ), p. 756. 88xVIII (November 1, 1903), 311. ; 79 6 9 1 relate in a strange and subtly sombre garment." "Falk," the first story in the second American volume, was found so interesting that most periodicals omitted comment on the other stories. Only the Few York Tribune mentioned them, "’ Amy i I Foster’ and ’To-morrow' are both remarkably striking stories," it j I said, "but ’Falk' is a little masterpiece."^ This preference was not usually shared by reviewers of the English volume. Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, for example, called "To morrow" the "finest essentially" of all the stories in that volume, j although he said that "Typhoon" was "brilliantly told, ... a small j masterpiece built around a delightfully humorous character." Of .'other stories he said, " 'Axny Foster’ is. not quite worthy of the j t author of 'Youth,' and 'Falk' is spoilt for me by a natural 1 71 repugnance, which perhaps has nothing to do with criticism." The i [Academy seems not to have shared the preference of Sir Arthur Quiller- | i Couch for "To-morrow," because it said nothing about that story. Of j"Typhoon" it said, "Mr. Conrad has the rare faculty of investing with i ja kind of savage personality the forces which themselves are subject ■to the unknown and invisible force which is at the heart of the world." "Falk" it called "a. mosaic, built of infinite fragments" and ; I i without plot, which it maintained that Conrad did not need, since he ! i I was "an interpreter not of incidents mechanically contrived, but of t t g g j Supplement (September 27, 1903), P» 11 • j ^Supplement (September 27, 1903), p. 12. ’ 71 I Bookman (London), XXIV (June, 1903), 108-109. I 80 moods and the human spirit." "Amy Foster" it said was "a piece of* true tragedy— the tragedy of attraction and misunderstanding." "Here," it concluded, "is life handled with extraordinary skill--life 72 free from any kind of sentimentality, bare to the nerve." As with Youth earlier, Conrad was again praised in almost every review for his descriptive powers and for the characterizations in the new volumes. Many favorable comments were made on Conrad's characterization and use of MacWhirr in "Typhoon." The New York ! Times said, "In MacWhirr Conrad has created a new character, , . . j entirely deficient of imagination, ... not so much matter-of-fact 73 as apparently dull, . . . and without imagination."' The New York Tribune said: Captain MacWhirr, the hero of the great fight, is portrayed j with perfect discretion as utterly unconscious of his heroic i qualities. He is, indeed, a commonplace man in many ways. Mr. Conrad knows well that if he were to make his man defiant or in any way self-assertive he would make him merely melo- 1 dramatic and would land in anticlimax. To exhibit him as a conqueror of the typhoon in any spectacular sense would be absurd.^ The New York Tribune and the Forum regarded the steamer itself as ; ,a character in "Typhoon." The first said: The steamer of the story, the Nan-Shan, impresses us as an ; organism with a soul. She is made no less real to us than the 1 captain and his men, and the struggle of these allies, ihe Nan- . 1 Shan and her people, with a storm of all but overwhelming j power is painted with a vividness that leaves us breathless, ! as though, in fact, we had passed through that struggle i 1 ourselves. ! 72LXIV (May 9, 1903), ^63. ^Supplement (September 20, 1902), p. 626. ^Supplement (September l4, 1902), p. 12. . . _ 81 And the Forum, carrying the personification of the Wan-Shan still further, said, The Wan-Shan is the hero. She is a veritable ship suffering under the uttermost stress of wind and wave, but chiefly interesting as the receptacle of varied life which strives, endures, cringes, and rages.75 Comments on the excellence of Conrad’s style, particularly in "Typhoon," were by no means rare. The New York Tribune said, "There is not to be found, even between the lines, a hint of straining nr/f after style"; the Reader said, "The whole thing is done in such 77 a masterly style"; and the Forum, more particular in its commenda tion, said, "The paragraph describing the first onslaught of the typhoon illustrates Mr. Conrad’s command of the niceties of stylistic effect, his power of conveying the physical fact and its moral effect." As an example of what it meant the Forum quoted a long passage from the story, in which it made particular reference to the line, "It was something formidable and swift, like the sudden breaking 78 of a Vial of Wrath."' Other commendations of Conrad's style appeared tq 80 1 Harper’s Weekly and in the New York Times. Of more concern in some British periodicals, however, than the ;particular matter of style was Conrad's method of narration. The 75XXXIV (January, 1903), ^00. Supplement (September 14, 1902), p. 12, 77i (December 1902), 101. 78XXXIV (January, 1903), ^00. 79xiVI (October k, 1902), lkl3. ^Supplement (October 2k, 1903), p. 75^. 82 Academy said: Many critics have complained of Mr. Conrad's indirectness. . . . There is reason in the complaint; though, for ourselves, we are willing to accept Mr. Conrad's work as it stands. For this indirectness, this returning upon himself, this effect, often disconcerting, of an abruptly introduced outside comment, are inherent parts of the extraordinary subjectivity of Mr. Conrad's method. Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch praised Conrad's narrative method, not entirely without reservation, as follows: I know that here is good literature; I guess that it is literature touched with genius; I am pleased and rather proud to find myself enjoying it whole-heartedly. . . . Still, as an experimenter, over many years, in more objective methods of story-telling (and as a convinced believer, let me say, that the synthetical objective method of presenting characters is so much the better than the analytical, as it is briefer), I begin to stare helplessly when Mr. James and Mr. Conrad | tuck up their sleeves and begin to weave a situation round I with emotions, scruples, doubts, hesitancies, misunderstand- \ ings, half-understandings; cutting the web sometimes with the i fiercest strokes; anon patiently spinning it again for another slice; and always moving with the calmness of men entirely sure of their methods, and confident that the end of the tale will justify them--as it always does. However much the Academy may have favored the indirectness of Conrad's narrative method, its implication that Conrad was difficult to read re-introduced into Conrad criticism a notion that had been j quite apparent in reviews of Lord Jim, although it had tended to disappear in those of Youth. Unfortunately the Athenaeum also gave further weight to this notion by saying, "Typhoon and Other Stories demands not mere scanning, but careful, watchful reading in every ( j line of it."83 I 81 ! LXIV (May 9, 1903), ^63. 82 Bookman (London), XXIV (June, 1903), 109. 83(May 2, 1903), pt. 1, p. 559. ___________________________ 83 The serious tone of Conrad’s work was again considered in some reviews. The New York Tribune mentioned the "strange and subtly sombre garment" in which the stories in Falk were cast and remarked 8 k that Conrad wrote "with crude, brutal force." The Academy linked the sombreness of tone in Typhoon and Other Stories to a lack of interest by Conrad in popular appeal. "Mr. Conrad . . . has no idea of popular appeal," it said; "he is a writer who is so possessed with the terror and beauty of the sea that he brings to his work a I 85 I sense ... of wide and sinister horizons." J During the years that Lord Jim. Youth, and Typhoon were being j read by British and American readers, several articles on Conrad I j appeared. Although most of these articles tended to be literary ! gossip more than criticism, the year 1902 marked an important point i in the growth of Conrad’s literary reputation because of the appearance of a long appreciation by Sir Hugh Clifford of Conrad1s work up to that time. The first of the articles, containing chiefly literary gossip, | was printed in the London Bookman in 1901 and was largely concerned with the marvel that a Polish-born sea-captain could become a literary artist. The opening lines of the article read: I ! It is not often that the seaman is endowed with the artist’s temperament. . . . But rare as this is, it is still | rarer to find a foreigner handling the language of his adopted country with a greater ease and brilliance than ninety-nine O j i Supplement (September 1^, 1902), p. 12. 85IXIV (May 9, 1903), ^63. 8 1 * . out of a . hundred native writers themselves. Yet it is this unlikely combination that is to be found in the work of Mr. Joseph Conrad. ° Following this information, which must have surprised many of the limited circle of Conrad readers of the day, the writer gave a brief, though accurate, sketch of Conrad’s father’s literary activity, | Conrad’s youth in Cracow, his sea-life, and his experience in the | i Congo. The last was detailed somewhat more than the rest of the account and was definitely related to his two stories with African i settings, "An Outpost of Progress':' and "The Heart of Darkness," i Another brief article in Current Literature presented much of the same information to American readers but also included more recent information on Conrad’s marriage and his residence in Essex. The j 'writer of the article said that Conrad did not "figure in the literary i 1 circles of London," and that his career had been one "of steadily growing success and fame." He further said that in his methods of work Conrad was "a law unto himself," and as editors had "more than once found out to their sorrow, he found it impossible to write upon I order." In closing, the writer called attention to the growth of 1 Conrad’s literary reputation and suggested as proof of this the fact that "Captain M. Forsyth of the British Navy" had "lately pronounced ' 87 ! him the ablest and most compelling of living writers." ! i The interest in Conrad as a person was also exploited in a .similar article in Literary News in 1902. Apparently the writer of (September 1901), 173. 87xxx (February, 1901), 222 85 the article had actually met or seen Conrad, for he said: In his walk Mr. Conrad suggests the sailor, and his kindness is eminently suggestive of the sea, while the nervous move ments of his arms and shoulders are characteristic of both the foreigner and the artist. It is with considerable difficulty that he is persuaded to talk of himself at all. Of even more interest than the writer *s information about Conrad * s personal appearance and behavior, though, was his report of Conrad's feeling for the English language. "He is full of an almost admiring I reverence for the English language,” he said. "Its infinite variety and boundless possibility for beautiful phrase and sentence are, he OO , says, immeasurably greater than those of French." j In a later article, published in 1903 in the Critic, M. H, Vorse , began by agreeing with the writer in the Literary News that Conrad 1 was not an easy man for an interviewer to talk to. "Mr. Conrad has failed to avail himself of a very puissant form of advertising, and one which would cost himself nothing," he said. "He has neglected to court the interviewer. . . .He has merely been writing books." He went on to prophesy that "in spite of this serious omission on the author's part," Conrad would become one of the best known writers of his generation. In the rest of his article Vorse gave a critical summary of Conrad’s literary accomplishments up to that time. In general summary of Conrad's method, he said, "Conrad can tell a dramatic and vigorous tale, and yet, without weakening the force of his story, suggest certain details, give sudden glimpses into the , strange corners of men's lives, — in a word he arrives at saying the 88 ! N. S., XXIII (May, 1902), 156. | unsayable." As important features of Conrad's method, Vorse cited his analysis of character as ’ ’ penetrating and subtle, . . . never for a moment checking the current of the story," and his versatility of mood. Among particular stories, he cited "Typhoon" as "the most i finished and perfect"; he stated that the stories in Youth struck a | "deeper note" than Conrad had struck before; and he objected that j "some of his 'Tales of Unrest* were grim to the point of self- consciousness." He then concluded, "But all of his work is so s . unusual and of so high a standard that for the sake of the public ! t one could wish that Mr. Conrad would advertise himself more. j The most important occurrence in Conrad criticism during the j years 1901, 1902, and 1903, however, was the appearance in 1902 of 1 i Sir Hugh Clifford's appreciation. Though highly laudatory, the ar-fcicle i might seem to a present-day reader too brief a tribute to a man who J j had by then written such volumes as The Nigger of the Narcissus, Lord j Jim, and Youth. Clifford began by admitting that the circle of Conrad readers was small, "still inexplicably small," but that "the publication of a new book by Mr. Conrad ranked as a notable event." i He made a point of saying that Conrad's "care and determination to ( give the public naught save his best were evident in every line" of <Conrad's work. In fact, Clifford felt, Conrad's very care in writing his books may have been a casual factor in keeping his public small. :He stated finally: His works resemble elaborate mosaic. ... The mind of their author is so subtle, he has put into them so much thought, I 89«a yriter Who Knows the Sea," Critic, XLIII (September, 1903), | 87 so much delicacy of touch, so much that is at once allusive and elusive, that at every reperusal some hitherto undetected nicety is revealed. ... The secret of Conrad's success, hut also of his failure, should perhaps be sought in this very fact. In considering particular features of Conrad's method, Clifford first spoke of style, as illustrated in Conrad's then recent volume j Youth. Although it was "occasionally difficult and to the casual reader at times . . . laboured, even self-conscious,1 1 he maintained that ! a closer study of it should lead to the conviction. . . that it I was the one and only mode of expression adapted to the purposes I of the author, or indeed possible to him. . . and, moreover, 1 that it was exactly suited to the subjects of which he treated, j ! But description, Clifford believed, was "unquestionably Conrad's : forte." Of it he said, "Conrad rises superior to the trammels of j ordinary realism because ... he has caught the very spirit of i them, and has the art to breathe it into his pages that his readers 90 may become imbued with it too." j Some of the best, and for Conrad probably the most gratifying, evidence of the appeal of his latest work was never made public . until after his own death, it being in the form of private letters j ! to him. George Gissing, for example, wrote Conrad a letter on I I Christmas Day, 1902, in which he said, "Several times, whilst reading •The End of the Tether* I have said to myself that I must risk the 1 impertinence of writing you a word about it. No fiction has so moved 91 ; me for years." Gissing*s praise of Typhoon and Other Stories. : 1 1 90"The Art of Mr. Joseph Conrad," Spectator, LXXXIX (November 29, 1902), 827-828. : ^Letter from George Gissing, dated December 25, 1902, in Twenty j L6vt6TS* _ . . _ ... . ___ _ __ I which Conrad had sent him, he expressed at length to Conrad in a letter dated May 9, 1903 (shortly before his death). Excerpts from the letter follow: Of "Typhoon" who can speak adequately? It is tremendous. The terror of it haunts me in the night season. I marvel at the power with which you have bodied forth each of those aailor- men,— bits of humanity made only the more true and impressive by that elemental fury which is trying to whelm them. "Amy Foster". . . takes great hold on me,— as pathetic a thing as can be found in literature. . . . Amy is a wonderful study in elementary womanhood— oh I how I see her I and your atmosphere— the chill, briny odour— Ah! ever present sounding of the sea. "Falk"— is it, or is it not, better than anything else in the book? . . . Falk himself is grand as a figure in the Niebelungenlied, yet as much of the homely earth as Hermann or Schomberg; the nameless niece is superb as a Norse goddess, yet there in the very flesh before me, and powerful over the senses. By Apollo! but this is fine work, and anyone who does not shout in delight over it I call a thistle-munching ass. "To-morrow" is of irony and pathos all compact. Tell me, pray, whoever got such emotion as this out of two lean cottages by the Kentish shore. Wonderful, I say, your mute or all but mute women. . . . That is your glorious power, to show man’s kindred with the forces of earth, and style to utter facts of human life and the aspects of the world in a profound harmony. Only a poet can do the like, and no books published in our day have so much poetry in them as y o u r s. 92 j During these early years Sir Edmund Gosse also became an admirer of the writings of Conrad. At any rate, Clifford said years later: ! As late as 1902, the late Sir Edmund Gosse, in conversation with the present writer, ranked Conrad with Thomas Hardy and George Meredith as one of the three English novelists of his day, and declined to be lured into an expression of opinion as 92Letter from George Gissing, dated May 9, 1903, in Twenty Letters 93 to which of them might Justly claim the place of honour. About this time, because of his admiration for Conrad’s work, W. H. Hudson sought Conrad's acquaintanceship. There seems to be no correspondence between Hudson and Conrad extant and Conrad is not j o l | . ; mentioned in any of Hudsonfe published letters, but Ford Madox i Hueffer has recorded an amusing account of Hudson’s first visit to j Conrad, during which Conrad mistook him for a prospective purchaser of the family pony. "Mr. Hudson then was staying at New Bomney and had walked over--fourteen miles-~in order to pay his respects to i the author of Youth, Heart of Darkness, Lord Jim and Almayer's Folly,"< 95 said Hueffer. Literary men who had followed Conrad's career from its ! beginnings continued to read and comment on each book as it appeared. Garnett expressed his admiration of Lord. Jim to Conrad, who wrote in | 1 reply, ! All I know now is that it /Lord Jim7 pleases you; and I declare, as true as there are blind, deaf-mute gods sitting above us (who are so clear-eyed^eloquent and sharp of hearing), I declare it is enough for me. i Galsworthy also praised Lord Jim in a letter which occasioned these lines of reply from Conrad: 93sir Hugh Clifford, Essay on An Outcast of the Islands, in A Conrad Memorial Library, pp. 16-17. j ^Edward Garnett, ed., Letters from W. H. Hudson (London: Dent, 1925). 9^Thus to Bevisit: Some Reminiscences (London: Chapman and Hall, 1921), p. 72. 9^Life and Letters, I, 290. 90 I was so touched by your letter. Believe me I was, though I did not answer it at once. Indeed it is very difficult to answer such a message from the very force of the emotions it awakens; I thought I was very fortunate to get such a response for my work. You've done so much for me and in so many ways that I have felt myself silenced a long time ago--but never have you done so much for me as when you wrote that letter.97 When Youth appeared two years later, Galsworthy wrote to Garnett, "Have just finished Conrad’s ’Youth.’ It is an epic, the first 98 story. Haven’t read the others yet." After reading the other stories in the volume, Galsworthy wrote Conrad a letter in which he seems to have praised the last story in the volume, for Conrad replied, "My dear fellow, you did put new heart into me with your 99 letter about the ’Tether.’" H. G. Wells seems also to have responded favorably to the story "Youth," although he wrote Conrad and suggested a revision of the ending. i J Henry James, too, continued to follow Conrad's career with j interest. He wrote Conrad a letter praising Lord Jim, which he had j read as a serial in Blackwood’s Magazine, and Conrad sent the letter j (subsequently lost or destroyed) to Edward Garnett with the lines: 1 I This morning November 12, 1900/ a letter came from Henry James.... I send you the H. J. letter. A draught from the Fountain of Eternal Youth. Wouldn't you think a boy had written ' 97Life and Letters. I, 297-298. 9®Edward Garnett, ed., Letters from John Galsworthy. 1902-1932 (London: Jonathan Cape, 1934) > p. 46> • ^Life and Letters I, 304. 79°Life and Letters. I, 248. 91 it? Such enthusiasm! Wonderful old man, with his record of wonderful work!1®1 James’s confidence in Conrad’s judgment in literary matters was further shown by his note to Wells, November 15, 1902, that he had 1 A O just shown Conrad a short synopsis of Wings of the Dove. Arnold Bennett also showed his continuing regard for Conrad by dedicating his Anna of the Five Towns to Conrad in September, 1902.^3 B. B. Cunninghame Graham too continued to follow Conrad’s career with avid interest. Unfortunately none of Graham's letters t were saved by Conrad, so we must again draw inferences from Conrad's \ [ letters to Graham. On February 8, 1899, Conrad wrote, "I am simply I _ r in seventh heaven to find you like the ’H/eartJ of D^arknesjs/' so far. j 104 You bless me indeed." In reply to a letter about Lord Jim, Conrad wrote Graham, "Your letter this morning made me feel better. Is it I possible that you like the thing so much?"In reply to a later j statement about the same book Conrad wrote, "Just a word to thank you for your letter. ... I can’t possibly agree with your praises of 1 a /T Lord Jim." And, after Graham had written Conrad a letter about i Typhoon and Other Stories. Conrad replied, "Thanks for your good I i ^01Letters from Conrad, p. 173. ✓ ! * 1 ! The Letters of Henry James, ed. Percy Lubbock (New York: ' Charles Scribner's Sons, 1920) I, 390. j ^^Life and Letters, I, 306 (note). ^^Life and Letters, I, 268. 10^Life and Letters, I, 275. ~^^Life and Letters , I, 275- I 92 letter. I am glad you like the shorter stories, but ,1e me berce dans 1*illusion that 'Falk' is le clou of that little show. During the years from 1900 through 1903, it may be said in < summary, Conrad’s reputation as a writer was characterized by a number of significant gains. Reviews tended to be longer and more analytical than those of earlier books and to be more favorable than before to Conrad as a writer of fiction. Increased attention was given to the fact that he had written other books than the book ! being reviewed. Critics like Alden for the Few York Times kept their ' ' ! I readers aware of new Conrad books soon to appear. Others mentioned j j ' previously published novels, frequently suggesting the improved I ! | quality of the more recent book, then under consideration. Several ; articles appeared in which not just Conrad's latest book but all of J his published writings were commented upon. Practically all reviews of the books of these years included favorable comments on features of method which in earlier reviews had been criticized adversely. With the publication of Lord "Jim in 1900, the objection (not infrequent in comments on earlier books) that , 1 Conrad’s characterizations were weak virtually disappeared. Lord Jim , 1 established Conrad as a creator of characterj the later books, ; Youth (1902), Typhoon (1902), Typhoon and Other Stories (1903), and Falk (1903), made his position in this respect even more secure. Within the course of appearance of these volumes objections to his | style were also greatly reduced. By the time of the publication of ; ~ * ~ ^Life and Letters, I, 31^- 93 Falk in the United States in 1903, Conrad*s reputation as a stylist became almost entirely unquestioned. Moreover, as with earlier books, his ability to describe and to create an atmosphere was i commented upon very favorably. I I The published writings of these years also seemed to critics to i i demonstrate Conrad’s versatility as a writer. True, the notion persisted that he was chiefly a writer of stories of the sea or of people who lived close to the sea, but many critics recognized that Conrad's use of the sea was unlike the writing of previous writers I of sea-fiction, with the possible exception of Melville. j Several insisted, though, that Conrad's books were not books j that one could read as he ran. The reviews in the Academy, among | the most analytical of all those of this period, as well as the I longest, defended Conrad, as each book appeared, against objections J to his over-all method of telling a story. But each of the Academy 1 | reviews, including Garnett * s lengthy one of "The Heart of Darkness," betrayed a self-consciousness that was probably harmful to Conrad. Each writer felt that a case for Conrad had to be made. This same j self-consciousness unfortunately characterized the well-intended article by Clifford. * i Critics, without always saying so explicitly, were becoming ' aware that Conrad's narrative method possessed a high degree of I originality. Frequent references to its impressionism or subjectivism ! showed this. Quiller-Couch, for example, spoke of Conrad's use of 1 the "subjective" method of narration and admitted its effectiveness, \ even while he stated his own preference for the more traditional j ’ 'objective" method. Apparent in articles of this period was an increasingly lively interest in Conrad as a person. The absorption of writers of the shorter articles with details of Conrad's past life began a trend that was to continue in subsequent writings about him. (Unlike readers of the years from 1902 through 1903 > those familiar with Conrad's life today, it must be recalled, have been long used to the marvel of his trilinguality coupled with his knowledge of the sea.) Further evidence of Conrad’s increasing reputation as a writer during these years was the continued interest in his career by literary men like Garnett, Galsworthy, James, Bennett, and Wells and the discovery and admiration of Conrad’s writings by others like Gissing and Gosse. By 1903 there was little doubt among leading critics of England, if not of the United States, that a major writer of English had appeared. CHAPTER IV RECEPTION OF THE NOVELS WRITTEN IN COLLABORATION: THE INHERITORS (1901) AND ROMANCE (1903) Ford Madox Hueffer wrote that "about Michaelmas, 1897," be had | 1 I received a letter from Joseph Conrad, in which the latter asked to i collaborate with him. Over twenty years later Hueffer said: He stated that he had consulted W. E. Henley as to his difficulties with English prose, which were great since he thought in Polish, expressed his thoughts to himself in French, and, only with great labour, rendered his thus-worded French , into English.1 j Hueffer may have been wrong in his dating of Conrad's letter, or the I two men were slow in reaching an agreement, for Conrad wrote i i Galsworthy, October 28, 1898, "I concluded arrangements for collabora tion with Hueffer. He was pleased. I think it's all right. Details 2 when we meet. The collaboration did not actually result from any suggestions of Henley, however, as Hueffer himself later indicated, 3 but probably from suggestions made by Garnett. It was strongly objected to by H. G. Wells, who, Hueffer said, "pleaded" with him 1 1 "not to spoil Conrad's style." "The wonderful Oriental style," I lnThus to Revisit," English Review. XXXI (July, 1920), 5. Although Hueffer changed his name to Ford in 1919, the surname "Hueffer" appeared on the title pages of his two important collabora tions with Conrad and so will be used in this study, "Call him Mr. Hueffer," Conrad told his wife in 1923- See Jessie Conrad, Joseph Conrad and His Circle (New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, 1935), p." 2&. ^Life and Letters, I, 253* ^Hueffer, Thus to Revisit: Some Reminiscences (London: Chapman and Hall, 1921), p. 26. _ _____________ 96 Wells said to him. "It's as delicate as clockwork and you'll only k ruin it hy sticking your fingers in it." With Garnett's sanction, hut without that of Wells, then, the collaboration was begun, and during the next several years it pro duced two books and a fragment of a third. Romance, the novel on which the two men began to work together in 1898 was not completed and published until 1903 partly because it was put aside during 1900 for a second work, The Inheritors. which was published in 1901. The first published work was largely from the pen of Hueffer, as state ments by both writers later showed. Conrad wrote on a blank leaf of a first English edition of the work, "There is very little of my writing in this work. Discussion there has been in plenty. F. M. H. i held the pen. Conrad's statement is substantiated by that of Hueffer: "'The Inheritors' is a work of seventy-five thousand words, as nearly as possible. In the whole of it there cannot be more than £ a thousand— certainly there cannot be two— of Conrad’s writing." , The contribution of each writer to Romance, the real fruit of the , I collaboration, Conrad accounted for as follows: | ! In this book I have done my share of writing. Most of the j characters (with the exception of Mrs. Williams, Sebright, and the seaman) were introduced by Hueffer, and developed 1 then in my own wa.y with, of course, his consent and collab- ! oration. The last part is (like the first) the work of I I I ^Hueffer, Joseph Conrad: A Personal Remembrance (Boston: London: ! Little, Brown and Co., 1925), p. bQ. j \ Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating (Hew York: Doubleday, Doran and Co., I929), p. 86. ^Hueffer, Joseph Conrad, p. lk2. Hueffer, except a few paragraphs written by me. Part second is actually a joint work. Parts three and four are my writing with here and there a sentence by Hueffer.7 Q Since these statements agree in essentials with Hueffer*s, we may assume that the second-published novel was a collaboration in fact as well as in name. Of the third work the two men wrote in collaboration (published as The Nature of a . Crime). Mrs. Conrad stated after her husband's death: Very little of this ''fragment" belongs to Conrad. Even that little had passed so completely out of his mind that when once I showed him the typed pages, which I had for many years in my possession, he disclaimed all knowledge of it. He said, in fact, that the thing had been sent by some complete stranger and directed me to destroy it. In 192*4-, when Mr. Hueffer unearthed the "Nattire of a Crime," Conrad refused to admit that he had ever heard of it. It was not until I discovered the two numbers of the Review that he could be made to believe in the existence of the printed pages. He then declared it to be too trivial to be reprinted, and he yielded to Mr. Hueffer*s request to be allowed to publish it in the Transatlantic. because, as he said, he was "tired of ar gument."9 The third work caused little stir when it appeared and, since it was | published two months after Conrad's death, was too late to affect i ! his reputation during his lifetime. A reviewer's comment that "in the end the value of the book will lie in the prefaces and the light ^From an unpublished letter to J. B. Pinker, dated March 12, ■ 1902j cited in A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 131 * - - I ! ®See "A Note on Romance," Appendix to The Nature of a Crime (Ne- 'York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 192*4-) and "That, Too, Is Romance, Part IV of Hueffer, Joseph Conrad, pp. 233-251. 9Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him (New York: Doubleday, Page, and Company, 1926), p. 151. 981 they throw on the collaborators' way of working together"*^ now seems a reasonable appraisal of the final importance of the book. The Inheritors and Romance. then, were the novels written in collaboration which did affect Conrad's reputation as a writer. Conrad’s later disclaimer of responsibility for more than a small part of The Inheritors was of course not known to readers at the time of the appearance of that book. Hence, although his actual share of the book was slight, readers of it saw his name on the title-page when it appeared in 1901 and, as with Romance in 1903# | probably held him as well as Hueffer accountable for what they found j in it. The Inheritors was an account of the usurpation of an established; government (presumably that of England) by a small group of "inheri- j 1 tors," bent on self-aggrandizement. Its reception was more unfavor- 1 able than favorable. The Saturday Review said: It is difficult to have patience with a book of this kind, if only because part of it is really good. ... If there were any sort of inevitability about the plot, the story might pass, for it contains good sketches of a statesman in Churchill and of a politician in Fox.H ( I The Academy wrote that the originals of the story were easy to I recognize and the story had a certain timeliness, since, as It said, I I "Inheriting tendencies are certainly about just now." It then added, ! 1 | "Yet the first interest should be the story, and that the authors l have failed to make either persuasive or vital. . . . Political ^Supplement (October 2, 1921+), p. 6ll 1;LXCII (September 28, 1901), 907. 99 12 comedy ... must be carried off with gusto. There is none here." The Spectator objected, "The central idea of the book is clever, 13 but the realization leaves a good deal to be desired." The Critic called it "a, queer, unpleasant story in which the central character is a 'Fourth Dimensionist*" and complained, "Vivid word pictures give the book a certain power, but not enough to make it worth 14 reading." The Independent stated, "The combined imagination of the two authors has created an ingenious farce which is too gruesome indeed to suggest comedy, but falls far short of the huge and bloody shoulders of real tragedy."15 On the other hand, the reviews in the Athenaeum and the Hew York Times were quite favorable. The Athenaeum exclaimed, "It is brilliant and clever, and whilst thoughtful, entertaining. ... More ability and artistry has gone into the making of it than may be found in four-fifths of the serious fiction of the year."1^ The New York Times said: "The Inheritors" is more than a clever study of contemporary manners, morals, and ideals. Mr. Conrad sees the significant facts of life and character. . . . The book lacks the emotional power of "Lord Jim," but it is clean, vigorous, and not machine made. ' | Opinions about particular features of method were varied. The 1 P LXI (August 3, 1901), 93. 13LXXVII (July 13, 1901), 61. ll+XXXIX (September 1901), 277. ■*-^LIII (October 26, 1901), 259. "^(August 3, 1901), pt. 2, pp. 151-152. 1^Supplement (July 13, 1901), p. ^99. 100 ] Spectator, for example, found fault with the authors' handling of character, because the "principal 'Dimensionist*" seemed "an intriguing adventuress. . . who used her wits to obtain political 1 Q power," and the other characters were "mere shadows." In contrast, i the New York Times referred to "Conrad's sensitive appreciation of i i the conflicting subtleties of human motive and conduct," which made ! I . 29 the story "actual and effective.” The style of the novel was adversely criticized in two reviews but was praised in a third. The Academy said: 1 The writing is never slovenly. . . . The author of Lord Jim j and Mr. Hueffer, however, should beware of ultra-delicacy of | expression. We remember no book in which so many sentences , collapse upon dots.^0 i I The Critic said, "The constant use of short, broken sentences to give j an effect of suspense and contact with the 'unrealizable* is tiresome ' 21 I to those who care for style." On the other hand, the Athenaeum j 22- said there that the novel possessed "an exquisite keenness of style.' It is doubtful whether or not the satirical purpose of the novel was generally understood or, if understood, appreciated. The Critic, |for example, may have failed to see that the book was to be read as ' contemporary political satire, when it remarked that the novel was a {"queer, unpleasant story" with the Fourth Dimensionist as "a i ' l8LXXVII (July 13, 1901), 61. ^Supplement (July 13, 1901), p. ^99 j * 20LXI (August 3, 1901), 93. 21XXXIX (September, 1901), 277* j 22(August 3, 1901), Pt._2, p. 151. __________________ | 101 forerunner of an unscrupulous race which was to overrun and eventually 23 exterminate the earth’s present inhabitants." The Saturday Review insisted that no license to exceed the limits of credibility be given the writers of the book, even though it might be satire, for it said, "The why and how the principal characters are ruined remains completely mysterious. That is the exasperating part of the book; „2k no reasons are given. The Independent made a similar objection: "As a matter of fact the political and financial fraud with which so i ] much destruction is wrought is too small and insignificant to be I f j commensurate with the disastrous results demanded by the ’super- j t 25 seders,1" The Spectator, recalling the sub-title of the book ■ "An Extravagant Story," complained, "The extravagance is not imagined 26 in sufficient detail to make it convincing." Moreover, said the Spectator, too many details in the scheme of the political intriguers were kept from readers for them to have a clear conception of what ! was occurring in the book. I Even the New York Times, in a review which was in all other ! respects favorable, was doubtful about this feature, of which it • -a 'said: The final verdict pronounced by this reader will depend upon - his capacity to enjoy satire of a subtle and highly finished order--directed, if he is an Englishman, against some of the ■ most cherished traditions and achievements of his country-- i 23XXXIX (September, 1901), 277. 1 2lfXCII (September 28, 1901), 907 • 25LIII (October 26, 1901), 597- 26LXXVII (July 13, 1901), 61. 102 and upon whether he is more interested in event for event's sake or for its potential and psychological relation to man.2? The phrase, "directed, if he is an Englishman, against the most cherished traditions and achievements of his country," so affected Conrad, when he read it, that he wrote an immediate reply to the New York Times, which is today interesting because it contains a statement of literary creed similar to that in his famous Preface to The Nigger 28 of the Narcissus, Bather surprising to a present-day reader of the reviews of » The Inheritors is the lack of comment on the fact of Conrad’s writing a book in collaboration. Most periodicals treated it as a matter of course, but the Athenaeum and the New York Times treated the novel as if it had been written by Conrad alone. The first said, "The book's craftmanship is such as one has learnt to expect from a j I book bearing Conrad's name." It further remarked, though, that there ; was "little trace in this book, save in the astonishing subtlety : and cleverness it betrays, of Joseph Conrad of 'Lord Jim’ and the 29 Far East." The New York Times said nothing about the authorship of 1 I the novel and spoke of it as if it had been written by Conrad alone. ! 1 ! ^Supplement (July 13, 1901), p. ^99* ( 2®"The Inheritors--a Letter from Joseph Conrad," New York Times Supplement (August 2k, 1901), p. 603. In defense of the satire in the I book, Conrad said: "The story is not directed against 'some of the ! most cherished traditions and achievements of Englishmen.' It is rather directed at the self-seeking, at the falsehood that had been (to quote the book) 'hiding under the words that for ages had spurred men to noble deeds, to self-sacrifice, and to heroism." (August 3, 1901), pt. 2, p. 151. j Romance was a melodramatic account of the hardships endured by two lovers, a young Englishman and the daughter of a Spanish grandee in their attempts to escape from the evil power wielded by an Irishman who claimed to be betrothed to the lady. In following the events of the story the reader was taken from England to the West Indies and back to England again. Like reviews of The Inheritors, those of Romance were almost all unfavorable. William Morton Payne, in the Dial, called it "a series of pictures. . . . rather than a coherent and skillfully 30 planned romance." The New York Times said: There is hardly a trace in "Romance" of the Conrad we have learned to know and admire in his other books, and the fact that this condition of things may be partly ascribed to his collaborator in the enterprise, Mr. Ford Hueffer, does not at all mitigate one’s consequent disappointment. It rather has the effect of increasing it, for collaborators are mysterious appendages at best, and there would seem to be no circumstances i in which Mr. Conrad could possibly need anyone to help him tell | a story. !The Academy called Romance a "not convincing though admirably clever' I ;story, and objected: ! The plot hangs fire in this as it must in all tales unless | breathlessly told, for the simple reason that, however apparently ^ hopeless the situation of hero or heroine, we know the end will i be happy.32 The Athenaeum, which had been one of the rare magazines to speak favorably of The Inheritors, said: 1 The whole of the book is not absolutely convincing and for that reason does not reach the level of Mr. Conrad’s unaided work. 3°XXXVII (July 16, 190*0, 37- 3^Supplement (May 1*4-, 190*4), p. 325• 32lxv (October 31, 1903), *^9. 1C& . . . The first three parts of the book would have been improved by a little judicious compression.33 The Outlook. although impressed by the "wealth of story interest" and the "brilliancy of imaginative writing" in the book, which, it felt, recalled Stevenson at his best, objected: ! The power of the tale is almost oppressive; it holds the imagination; it moves the emotions and arouses the sympathies; but it is too constantly near the very verge of tragedy to entertain.3^ Only the review in the Illustrated London Hews was wholly favorable. "Nothing exactly like it in quality has been achieved j I for many a long day in this country," said the writer. "Indeed it stands and probably will stand, as a thing by itself in our literature.' I In the matter of sensation merely it puts into the shade works that i , 35 I have made a dozen reputations." j I Concerning the characterizations in the novel, periodicals | I showed little agreement. The Academy said that the co-authors had i been guilty of "inspiration drowned by elaboration" and that characters of the book possessed "the outward semblances of men and women" who were "all soulless." Payne wrote in the Dial, on the other hand, that the characters were "drawn with the power of i t I characterization" that readers had "learned to expect from Mr. j I I Conrad’s genius." The Athenaeum believed Conrad’s most successful ! (November 7* 1903), pt. 2, p. 610. ^LXXVII (June 18, 190*0, h2k-k25. 35(November 7, 1903)* p. 688. 3^LXV (October 31, 1903)* * * - 69. : I : 37xxxvil (July 16, 190*0 , 37* I 105 characterization was the heroine, who was ’ ’ wholly charming and, marvelous to relate, never obtrusive, hut the New York Times maintained that Tomas Castro was "the only character of flesh and blood" among the "personages. . . much seen and heard in the wild succession of impossible events that crowd Mr. Conrad's p a g e s ."39 Less was said about the style of Romance than about its characterizations. The Athenaeum said briefly, "The writing is distinguished though in parts it verges upon, and even lapses into, preciosity."^® Other reviews I have consulted omitted comment on | i j the style of the novel. Some periodicals commented on the rapid action in the novel— how incidents were piled on incidents and how scenes were rapidly shifted. Recognizing this as uncharacteristic of Conrad's method, the Outlook I 'said: j I Lack of story interest has been a rather common complaint ; against Mr. Conrad, even among those who admire his rare powers of descriptive writing, his deep love and knowledge of the sea ; and sea life in all its moods, and his perhaps over-subtle analysis of passion and temperament. . . . This cannot be said of "Romance. jThe Illustrated London News wrote favorably of the rapid shifting of i ; ' scenes in the novel and recommended it "as a story that will certainly ' | enthrall its readers."^2 The Academy said, "The story is full of 1 I 3®(November 7, ^-903), pt. 2, p. 6l0. 3^Supplement (May l4, 1904), p. 325* ' j ^(November 7, 1903), pf* 2, p. 610. ‘ ^LXXVII (June 18, 1904), 424. ^(November 7, 1903), p. 688. 106! exciting adventure, full of dramatic incident." In contrast to reviews of The Inheritors, those of Romance manifested great interest in the fact of Conrad's collaboration. A number of periodicals mentioned the collaboration pointedly, and i several of them objected to it. The New York Times exclaimed, j "There would seem to be no c ire vims tances in which Mr. Conrad could ! possibly need anyone to help him tell a story.’ This objection was also raised in the remark in the Athenaeum. "Even in this well- wrought story there is that which, judged fairly by the side of | Mr. Conrad’s other work, makes the reviewer regret the j collaboration," and in the observation in the Academy that Conrad had "too strong an individuality to be able to do himself justice 46 - I when writing in harness with anyone." Contrary to this opinion was that of the writer in the Bookman of a brief note on the nature of Conrad’s collaboration with Hueffer. In the note he declared, "Mr. Conrad will get whatever there is of honour and Mr. Hueffer 47 whatever there is of blame, or they will be swamped together." | | Unfavorable as the reviews of both The Inheritors and Romance I were, they were at least a recognition of the joint literary efforts ; i I of Conrad and Hueffer. As such, they were in contrast to the silence | ( i ! i ^3LXV (October 31, 1903), 469. ^ Supplement (May 14, 190*0, P* 325. ! 1 ^ (November 7, 1903), pt. 2, p. 6l0. j 1 ^6LXV (October 31, 1903), 469. ‘ ^7xiX (August, 1904), 544. j 107 among men of letters who had made appraisals (often to Conrad himself) of books written earlier by Conrad alone. Perhaps the reaction of many such persons was like that of Arnold Bennett, who wrote in his journal some years later, I happened to see Conrad and Hueffer*s Komance at Frank's at lunch today, and I took it to read. I read about 20 pages after lunch, . . . but I doubt if I shall get much further in it >8 Hueffer himself gave what may well be the final evaluation of the i two books, when he wrote in 1920, "I fancy that neither /The _ h9 Inheritors or Romance7 has any artistic value." j In fairness to Hueffer it would seem unwise, however, to consider his collaboration with Conrad entirely fruitless. True, the books Conrad wrote in collaboration with Hueffer did little directly to advance Conrad's reputation as a writer, but after an j examination of Hueffer * s various accounts of the collaboration, we I realize that Conrad received other benefits that affected his reputation indirectly. H. G. Wells's appraisal of Conrad's debt to i i Hueffer, which follows, mentions the chief such benefits: j I think Conrad owed a very great deal to their early ! association; Hueffer helped greatly to "English” him and j his idiom, threw remarkable lights on the English literary j world for him, collaborated with him on two occasions and | conversed interminably with him about the precise word and i ^The Journal of Arnold Bennett (New York: The Literary Guild, 1933), P. 3^9. ^9"Thus to Revisit," English Review. XXXI (July, 1920), 10. 108 perfection in writing.^0 In summary, it appears that Conrad's career as a writer was probably not directly furthered by his collaboration with Ford Madox Hueffer* Not only were reviews of The Inheritors and Romance briefer and less numerous than those of earlier books, but they were much more unfavorable than favorable. The steady improvement in Conrad's position as a writer, particularly in the periodicals of his day, was interrupted to a degree by the appearance of these two novels bearing Conrad's name on the title-page. But it would be ! easy to over-estimate the harm done. It is well to recall that The j Inheritors (1901) appeared between Lord Jim (1900) and Youth (1902), and Romance (1903) appeared in the same year that Typhoon and Other \ Stories appeared in England and in the year that Falk appeared in the United States. The strength of the volumes bearing Conrad's name alone on the title-page was so well recognized in periodicals that relatively little attention was given to the less popular books written in collaboration. A very noticeable feature in reviews of The Inheritors was the I slight attention paid to the fact that the book was written by two 1 men. As shown above (p. 102), the Athenaeum and the New York Times. commented as if Conrad alone had written the novel. Fortunately for i ! j 1 5°H. q. wells, Experiments in Autobiography (New York: The ; : Macmillan Co., 193^), p. 531. Hueffer's more detailed claims are given chiefly in his Joseph Conrad: A Personal Remembrance, pp. 25f and l68f; his essay on The Inheritors, in A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 75j and his Return to Yesterday, p. 187* Against his claims should be read the counter-claims of Mrs. Conrad, to be found in her Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him, pp. 113, 116, and 1&9, and in her Joseph Conrad and His Circle, pp. 58, 71, 116, l4o, and 221. 109 him, reviews in both periodicals were favorable. In contrast, reviews of Romance reflected great concern that Conrad had taken part in a literary collaboration. Several of them expressed regret over the fact, but their very regret amounted to a recognition of the individuality, if not the originality, of Conrad's own literary work. I This recognition caused a few critics to allow the high quality of Conrad’s previous work to obscure their Judgment of the joint work of both men. For example, Payne stated in the Dial that the characters of Bomance were "drawn with the power of characterization ; that we have learned to expect from Mr. Conrad's genius." (See above, j p. 104). i But the reverse was usually true. Critics frequently commented j | I on the difference in quality between Conrad’s own books and those of 1 i |the collaborators, usually to the disadvantage of the latter. Some- | I i times, though,they simply recognized the difference in quality between Conrad's unaided and his collaborative work, Some of them recognized, for example, that in Romance rapid action, with one incident quickly giving place to another, was of great, if not of Jprime, importance in securing reader interest. j The most important conclusion that can be drawn from the ! reception of The Inheritors and Bomance is that by 1903 most critics | I of Conrad’s writings had developed an admiration for the power of I J ■his unaided writing, power based on definitely recognizable attributes.! The effect of the collaborations on Conrad's literary career seems thus to have been only like that of an eddy in a strong current. By 1 the end of 1903 he was highly regarded as a creator of atmosphere, as , 110 a creator of character, as a stylist, and above all as a writer of sea fiction. One after another, these proficiencies had been recognized by critics, as his fiction from Almayer's Folly in 1895 to Youth and Typhoon in 1902 and 1903 appeared in England and the United States. By the end of 1903 Conrad’s reputation with the leading literary men of his day, as well as with reviewers, had reached a height from which it was to fall somewhat during the years from 1904 until mid-1912. But Conrad did not know this, nor did he know that it would be nine more years before his books would be widely sold. i i I I CHAPTER V CRITICAL RECEPTION OF CONRAD'S WRITING: 1904 UNTIL MID-1912 Between 1904 and mid-1912 Conrad published six books. Nostromo (1904) was an account of the influence of a silver mine on some I Europeans and South Americans who were involved in a political revolu tion in South America. It was followed by The Mirror of the Sea (1906), a collection of essays in which Conrad expressed his feelings about the !sea and the men who sailed it. The Secret Agent (1907) was an account of a London anarchist who, in a misguided attempt to blow up the I I 1 Greenwich Observatory, killed his young brother-in-law and was himself j ■killed by his avenging wife. "Gaspar Ruiz," the first of the six stories in A Set of Six (1908), was an account of the events leading to the heroic death of a South American revolutionist who allowed a cannon ] |to be fired from his back. Two others, "The Informer" and "An Anarchist" were psychological studies of anarchists. "The Brute" re- | ■ counted the accidental killing of a captain's fiancee by a jinxed ship, i "The Duel" was an account of a drawn-out duel fought by two officers who lived through Napoleon’s wars. "II Conde" related how a northern 1 jvisitor was forced to leave Naples by a thief who tried unsuccessfully jto rob him. Under Western Eyes (1911) was a novel in which a Russian left his homeland after assisting in the arrest of the assassin of a public official. Later, in Switzerland, he met and fell in love with 1 . 1 ;the assassin's sister and confessed his duplicity to her. Some Reminiscences. or A Personal Record (1912), as it was titled in the j United States, was a book of reminiscences in which he recounted much of his earlier life as a Pole, as a seaman, and as a writer. J ! By 1904, before any of the above books had been published, Conrad had come to be regarded by critics in England and the United States as | a major writer. His skill as a creator of atmosphere had been recognized by critics in his first two novels, Almayer's Folly (1895) and An Outcast of the Islands (1896). Doubts about his ability to create and develop character had almost entirely disappeared from criticisms after Lord Jim was published in 1900. Adverse comments on Conrad’s style, which had been particularly apparent in reviews of his first two books, had disappeared after Youth was published in 1902. The reputation that Conrad enjoyed at the beginning of 1904, of being a writer of great talent or of genius, continued during the years | jwhich followed. During 1904 several reviews of Nostromo made statements which confirmed this belief. The London Bookman wrote of "the undoubted genius that had been spent freely" in making such a "remarkable book" as' Hostromo.1 The Independent declared that behind the writing of the novel 1 was "the observation of a great man on the case, a mind that will not 1 confine itself to facts when truths are so much more worthy of expres- j P I sion. ¥. L. Alden, in his review in the New York Times, spoke of him- | I o : Self as one who yielded "to no one in admiration of Mr. Conrad's genius. " - 5 I | Similar statements were made in reviews of The Mirror of the Sea , 1(1906) and The Secret Agent (1907) • In appraising the first of the i , , 1 [two books, the Literary Digest referred to Conrad as a writer to ; J j , whom one hardly hesitated to apply the epithet of genius." Although j the word genius was not used in reviews of The Secret Agent, several of them included statements which indicated high esteem for Conrad’s talent. In England Desmond McCarthy called him "a master of vivid t Z , description and of the psychology of violent emotion." In the United ! i ! 1XXVII (February. 1905), 221. ! 2LVIII (March^, 1905), 557. ! 3(October^, 1904), p. 735- ^XXXTII (November 10, 1906), 685. j ^Albany Review (London), II (November, 1907), 231. I 113 States, Stewart Edward White wrote of Conrad’s "marvelous faculty of fixing a scene in suspension as by a flash of lightning" and his "power of bringihgout a character by a multiplicity of little touches, the insight that has made his work a delight." The Spectator 7 praised Conrad as "a literary sorcerer of the first rank." Further statements of this type were made in reviews of A Set of Six (1908), Under Western Eyes (1911), and A Personal Record (1912). In commenting upon A Set of Six the Athenaeum said, "Now that Mr. Meredith and Mr. Hardy no longer produce novels, it is j probable that no other writer gives so much pleasure as Mr. Conrad j to those who appreciate fine craftmanship in fiction."^ Of the same J 1 novel the North American Review said, "Mr. Conrad has more than great ■ ------------ 9------ ! talent; he has genius." In several reviews of A Personal Record I Conrad was praised in similar terms. The Independent referred to | i I him as a writer often called "the most notable man among all those ! who are today writing English prose. " ' * " 0 The Athenaeum said, "His poignant and distinguished work in the language ’of his secret choice* need fear no criticism, and has long earned the regard of the minds best worth attention."^ The New York Times stated: ! 1 ^Bookman, XXVI (January, 1908), 531. ! 7XCIX (September 21, 1907), ^00. ®(August 29, 1908), pt. 2, p. 237. | 9cxciv (December, 1911), 936. * 1 10LXXII (March 28, 1912), 678. A Personal Record. Conrad’s 1 second book of reminiscence, was published in England as SQKLS ; Reminiscences, but the American title, A Personal Record, was finally | ! used in both British and American editions of his collected works. •^■(February 3, 1912), pt. 1, p. 12^. He it is to whom the men that in our day axe making English literature— men of many minds and styles— will send you if you ask them who is, among them all, the truest artist and the most splendid and honourable craftsman in that business of holding the mirror up to nature with mere words, which each pursues in his degree.^ Critical studies during these years devoted to the whole of Conrad’s work contained further evidence of the high regard critics had for his abilities as a writer. In an article written for the Atlantic Monthly in 1906, John Albert Macy wrote at length of Conrad’s "shortcomings," but ended by saying; So our reason for dwelling on Mr. Conrad•s shortcomings is because his books are thoroughly worth consideration. His advent is really important. More than any other new writer he is a master of the ancient eloquence of English style; no one since Stevenson has surpassed in fiction the cadence and distinction of his prose.13 Two years later, in a study that was almost wholly favorable to Conrad, John Galsworthy said of Conrad’s writings up to that time; "The writing of these ten books is probably the only writing of the last twelve years that will enrich the English language to any great , extent. Early in 1912 Frederic Taber Cooper wrote, "With the [possible exception of Mr. Henry James, there is no living writer of ! fiction in English whom it behooves the critic to approach with more j modesty than Joseph Conrad."'1 '^ I I Belief in Conrad’s sincere devotion to his craft had become 12(February 18, 1912), p. 771. 13XCVIII (November, 1906), 701. ^"Joseph Conrad: A Disquisition," Fortnightly Review, N. S., LXXXIII (April, 190S), 630. Joseph Conrad," Bookman, XXXV (March, 1912), 6l. 115 fairly apparent by the beginning of 190^, in spite of the neglect of his own statement of creed in the Preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus. During the years from 190^ through mid-1912, however, this belief grew steadily among critics. I have been able to find no statement of it in reviews of Nostromo and only one in those of The Mirror of the Sea, (Conrad never allowed his writing to fall into "second-hand modes of thought and speech," said the Spectator of the s 16 latter book;, but by the time of publication of The Secret Agent in 1907* the belief was stated more often. The Outlook said, "Mr. 17 Conrad is always an artist in literary effects," and Cooper, in the Bookman, wrote at length of Conrad's scrupulous and successful effort to make a tragedy rather than a melodrama of The Secret 18 ~ Agent. Between 1908 and mid-1912 such statements became more common. Edward Thomas wrote in the London Bookman that A Set of Six ! 19 l was written by "a man . . . vowed to beauty," and the Athenaeum, in ■ commenting upon the same book, wrote that Conrad would "never betray 20 our confidence by writing unworthy stuff." Perceval Gibbon, in his review of Under Western Eyes maintained that Conrad had written into it "the fatalism of sincere art, where everything that is real : 21 1 - j is inevitable •" In commenting upon Some Reminiscences the Athenaeum j » I I XCVII (December 1, 1906), 889. 1 t 17LXXXVII (October 12, 1907, 309. l8XXYI (February, 1908), 670. 19XXV (October, 1908), 39. I 20(August 29, 1908), pt. 2, p. 237. 2^Bookman (London), XLI (November, 1911), 9^. s’ ' 116 said, "There can he no question about the dignity and sincerity of 22 Mr. Conrad's view of letters," and, in appraising the same book, the Spectator said, "Conrad's own ardour will not let him sink below a 23 certain power." In its review of A Personal Record the Worth American Review also mentioned Conrad's pre-occupation with his own art. "The subject which evidently he treats as larger and more 1 significant /than his own life/, his art," it said, "recurs 2 1 1- cons tantly." 1 During this period, several of the leading literary men of the day wrote private expressions of this conception, either to Conrad j himself or to other literary men. In 1906 Galsworthy wrote, "Conrad t (a painter's writer) is perhaps the best specimen I can think of, of ; a pure artist (there is practically nothing of the moralist in him) amongst moderns."2^ In 1906 also, E, V. Lucas wrote to Conrad, "Tour book /The Mirror of the Sea7 has made me very sad— as all beautiful j works of art do. . .1 don't mind confessing that I cried a little as ( 26 I read it." In 1912 Arnold Bennett wrote Conrad a letter in which he said: | 22(February 3, 1912), pt. 1, p. 12k. ! 23CIX (July 13, 1912), 61. ^CXCV (April, 1912), 569. 2^Letter to B. H, Mottram, printed in H. V. Marrot, The Life and Letters of John Galsworthy (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1936), p. 19&. 2^Letter from E. V. Lucas, dated October 91 1906, in Twenty Letters. 117 Only other creative artists can understand a creative artist. Which limits the public comprehension rather severely. But if one could hut convey to you the passionate comprehension which some of us have of your work, I think the effect on your health would he good, I wish I could acquaint you with my state of mind--intense satisfaction in seeing a thing truly done mixed with anger because I know I can never do it as well myself.^7 Public statements of belief in Conrad’s sincerity as an artist by leading critics of the day were made chiefly toward the end of this period. In 1908 Galsworthy made a statement of this conception which indicated that he had in mind Conrad * s own literary creed (as expressed in the preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus). "Eyes; it seems a little thing! But to 'see' is the greatest gift of all. . . .1 Everything is beautiful to those who have the humor to perceive," he 1 said. "Birth and decay, virtue and vice, youth and old age, even j j the real and touching value of the departmental Briton— all these 28 Joseph Conrad sees, and has put in terms of a profound philosophy." In 1911 Perceval Gibbon called Conrad "one of those aristocrats in our literature who have never stooped below the level of their powers, whose standards of endeavour have never been adjusted to the ex pediency of the moment."2^ Also during that year Ford Madox Hueffer said that Conrad was "one of the two or three English writers who 30 1 uphold the despised standard of Art for Art’s sake." Further : i ! 1 1 ! I ?7 1 | Letter from Arnold Bennett, in Twenty Letters. 2^"Joseph Conrad: A Disquisition," Fortnightly Beview, N. S., ! ' LXXXIII (April, 1908), 630. 2^"Joseph Conrad: An Appreciation," Bookman (London), XXXIX (January, 1911), 179* I 3®"Joseph Conrad," English Beview, X (December, 1911), 75» \ 118 expression of this belief was given in 1912 by the writer of an article entitled "Conrad*s Profession of Literary Faith." Quite apart from that socially conscious group of writers— -Shaw, Wells, Chesterton, Bennett, and others--who are making history to-day in English literature, stands Joseph Conrad, a solitary and distinguished figure. To their garrulity, he opposes self-restraint; to their moralizing, what he would describe as conscience, an individual artistic conscience. . , , Conrad professes nothing but a striving for artistic verity. The culmination of this development was probably reached in an i j article by Edwin BJorkman, which also appeared in 1912. BWorkman's thesis was contained in the assertion that, "as an artist" Conrad held "a place apart" and appeared to his readers as "a sort of | modern knight of the Holy Grail, seeking ever the wondrous vessel j I in which beauty, worth, and truth are said to mingle in triune radiance." In a section of his article entitled "The Wizardry of his I Style," BJorkman listed as features of Conrad's artistry "his power | i of evoking vivid images"; "an equally notable power of characteri- J zation, of making us grasp situations or souls by means of some J I , felicitous phrase that could not be forgotten"; his "merciless | faculty of observation," which lay "back of each happy expression" and ■ i : was made up of "little touches of reality, so subtle that not one j man in a thousand would think of them"; his ability to "take us to j any part of the globe and make us feel at home there" because he i j knew "every mood of man and how to make us share it"; and his ability to put into his novels something that Conrad himself "may or may not have been conscious of, . . . a strange but unmistakable symbolism," i ^Current Literature, LII (April, 1912), ^71 • 119 which took the form of "some elementary passion in many shades and variations." In closing, Bjorkman stated: A man who has looked so deeply and shrewdly into the human heart might he expected to confess some social purpose. This Conrad will not do. He is the artist, the observer— not the judge or the reformer. Saints and knaves find equal justice at his hands, his one avowed object to reveal man to himself.32 Hand in hand with the conception of Conrad as a writer conscientiously devoted to his art during these years went the conception of him as a writer of great originality, who could not easily be classed with other writers of the day. Statements of this conception appeared with some frequency in the reviews. In commenting on Nostromo. the London Bookman said, Among present day novelists there is no one more reliable and individual than Mr. Conrad. His distinction of style and his delicately minute characterization are as difficult of analysis as they have proved of imitation.33 In its review of The Mirror of the Sea the Athenaeum said, "There are readers who will enjoy this volume more than any other thing the 34 writer has given us, on account of its distinction of style." In complaining of the complexity of The Secret Agent, the Athenaeum declared, "No good judge is likely to accuse Mr. Conrad of intentional obscurity in any of his fine work; but his temperament and mind are remarkable and rare." Edward Thomas, in his review of A Set of Six 32"Joseph Conrad: Master of Literary Color." American Monthly Review of Reviews. XLV (May, 1912), 557-5^0. 33XXVII (February, 1905), 221. 3^(October 27, 1906), pt. 2, p. 513. 3^(September 28, 1907), pt. 2, p. 3&1. 120 in the London Bookman, spoke of three of the six stories of that volume— "of a mad ship, of an anarchist and of a Camorra"--as "not ,,36 imaginable in any other man’s hands. Conrad’s unusual originality was commented upon in several reviews of Under Western Eyes. Perceval Gibbon wrote that the novel was "pure Conrad from beginning to end, a characteristic conception 37 presented as only the author could present such themes." The Saturday Review commented on Conrad’s immersion in "Russian habits of thought" and added: j I Mr. Conrad is so original a thinker that there is no need to | suppose him indebted to either Shevtchenko or Chernishevki j for a view so accurate and so little appreciated even by the people to whom those writers proclaimed it.3® Current Literature, objecting to comparisons of Conrad to Tolstoy, Dostoievsky, or Turgenief, said, "His individuality refracts now | and then in a way to warrant the comparison; but Mr. Conrad possesses j I On angles of refraction that are all his own."J7 < Appreciation of Conrad’s originality was also expressed during these years by other critics. One wrote in the Academy early in 1904-, Since Mr. Conrad wrote ’The Nigger of the Narcissus* there has been no question of his being a personality in modern literature. . .. His point of view, are emphatically his own. 3^XXXV (October, 1908), 39. ^Bookman (London), XLI (November, 1911)> 95• 38CXII (October lb, 1911), ^95* 3^LII (February, 1912), 237* ^°LXVI (February 20, 190U), 198. 121 After the appearance of The Mirror of the Sea in 1906, Edward Garnett wrote Conrad: "I think you ought to be very proud of the Mirror of the Sea. It stands quite by itself. There is nothing like it ,,1+1 anywhere. In articles which appeared at the end of this period, Frederic Taber Cooper in the United States and Stephen Beynolds in England called attention to the originality of Conrad's work. Cooper wrote, "Conrad is one of the very few who have added something h2 absolutely new to the art and the technique of his vocation," and, in more detail, Beynolds stated: ; Of the two originalities— that which arises from being in the ! forefront, ahead of other people but in their line of progress , and that which stands on one side viewing life from a different , angle— Conrad's is distinctly the latter, an originality in J kind rather than degree. His only literary school is the one which he himself may, or may not, found.^3 The interest in Conrad as a highly original writer was not always an i unmixed blessing though. Occasionally, even writers with the best of j intentions referred to it in terms that might well have been of small service, if not of actual harm, in furthering Conrad's career as a ! writer. For example, Clifford wrote in 190^4-, "Mr. Conrad's books, I I I say it without fear of contradiction, have no counterparts in the ! entire range of English literature." Had he ceased there, his i | statement would have aided Conrad, but he went on to add that i ! i ' Conrad's books were all "peculiarly ^/italics mine7, arrestingly i ^Second letter from Edward Garnett, dated October 20, 1906, in Twenty Letters. Joseph Conrad," Bookman. XXXV (March, 1912), 6l. ^"3"Joseph Conrad and Sea Fiction," Quarterly Beview, CCXVTI (July, 1912), 162. ________ __________ _______________________ 122 original. That is their key-note, their greatest distinction, alike in their thought and in their manner."*^ Galsworthy's reference two J 15 years later to Conrad's position among novelists as "unique ^ may also have "been harmful. A further reference to the unusual side of Conrad's work was made in the review of Some Reminiscences in the 1 I Spectator to Conrad's "fierce objectivity which gives his work its peculiar quality."^ The occasional mention of Conrad' s work as unusual rather than original would probably have been less harmful to his reputation had | there not also been, during the years from 190*4- until mid-1912, an ! ! increasing interest in the foreignness of Conrad's life and work. | This interest, which had been apparent in criticisms of Conrad's 1 1 writings published before 190*4, was fairly rare in reviews at the ( ] beginning of the second period of Conrad's career. In its comments j on The Mirror of the Sea the Hat ion, for example, wrote, 'Mr. Conrad, ! » of Polish birth, is quite as much French as English in his literary ; *+T instinct and manner." But when Under Western Eyes (with its j Russian characters and partially Russian setting) and A Personal j ' I Record (with its depiction of Conrad's early life in Poland and in j France) appeared toward the end of this period, a number of periodicals again evinced interest in Conrad's foreignness. In its review of j ^"The Genius of Mr. Joseph Conrad," North American Review, I CLXXVIII (June, 190*4-), 8*4-3. ^^Fortnightly Review, N. S., LXXXIII (April, 1908), 629. k6CIX (July 13, 1912), 61. ^LXXXIII (November 1, 1906), 375. ' Under Western Eyes the New York Times called attention to the fact that Conrad "was horn in Eussia of Polish heritage" and said Conrad had "drawn with good effect upon whatever knowledge and sympathetic understanding of Eussian character and conditions may have come to him in the writing of his new novel. The Athenaeum said of that novel, "It is very un-English work— indeed, the hook reads like a translation from some other tongue, presumably Eussian. It shows j definite affinities with the great Eussian novels. jn Bookman, | Frederic Taber Cooper commented at length on the effect of Conrad's foreign background on the style in Under Western Eyes; | Just as a suit of clothes made in a foreign country always has an unmistakably alien air, so an author horn and educated abroad will always clothe his thoughts in a way that strikes us as different, if not eccentric,— quite independent of his English. Mr. Joseph Conrad is a good illustration of this. ... He clothes his thoughts, not in incorrect English— on the contrary, he possesses a rather unusual and enviable style,— different English. . . . The clothing of Mr. Conrad’s | thoughts is essentially of foreign cut, necessarily and 1 properly so, because they are designed to fit thoughts which are also born abroad.50 In reviews of A Personal Eecord both Conrad's early life and his t exotic style were found worthy of mention. The Catholic World said "The Polish seaman and writer, Joseph Conrad, . . . has just published a volume of reminiscences of his very full and extraordinary life."'*1 The Spectator said that the reader could not really ^(December 10, 1911), P. 8l8. ^(October 21, 1911), pt. 2, p. U83. 50xxxiv (December, 1911), ^0. 51XCV (May 12, 1912), 25^. 124 appreciate the work unless he realized that Mr. Conrad, for all his wonderful command of our tongue, is still writing in a foreign language. It is not that he "blunders or palpably misuses words, but one seems to realize in his writing a perpetual vigilance which eo betrays itself only on those rare occasions when it slumbers. By the time of the publication of A Personal Record in 1912, interest in Conrad’s life, apart from his writings, had become so pronounced that several periodicals made a point of mentioning how little Conrad had let his readers know about himself as a person. t Perceval Gibbon wrote in the London Bookman; Few books of autobiographical flavour and intention have so good a reason for their appearance as ”Some Reminiscences*’ by Joseph Conrad. . . . The "fifteen years of unbroken silence before praise or blame," to which the author lays claim in his "familiar preface," have also been years of increasing curiosity concerning the strange and diverse personality which glimmered like a veiled lantern behind the . . . novels and tales which make up the body of Mr. Conrad’s work as a w r i t e r .53 The Spectator declared, "This short and random volume does much to make intelligible a personality which to the English mind must have appeared remote and mysterious." The New Tork Times also complained that, during the fifteen years Conrad had written, the world had 55 "learned almost nothing of the man." Early in this period writers of literary news items also made much of Conrad’s foreign heritage. In 1904 a writer of a section of 52CIX (July 13, 1912), 60. 53xli (April, 1912), 26. 5^0 IX (July 13, 1912), 60. 55(February 18, 1912), p. 78. " ” ’ ’ ’ - 125! the Academy which bore the title "Personalities" told his readers that he had recently had an interview with Conrad, the Pole and sailor. He made much of the fact that Conrad, "with a knowledge of more than one language, deliberately chose English for the expression 56 of his imaginings." During the same year similar information was ! I given readers in this country by American writers. Under the | caption "Mr. Alden*s Views," ¥. L. Alden wrote in the New York Times of a legend that Conrad had begun his "independent career" as a newsboy in Paris. Although he gave no credence to this legend, he ! 1 did offer his readers others no more truthful— that Conrad had been | educated at a Polish university and tha.t he had been for some years I ; an officer in the French navy. 1 Another writer stated in Bookman ' (with greater accuracy) that Conrad had been born in Poland, had j begun Ms career as a seafaring man in the French merchant service, and had "knocked his way about through nearly all of the travelled waters of the globe." More than any other early writer of this period, however, Sir 1 I Hugh Clifford stressed the foreignness of Conrad*s writing. Mr. I Conrad writes with the utterance that is given to him, the utterance j which is his through the circumstances of birth, race, experience, j training and even tradition," he wrote in 190*4-, "all of which, in J 1 1 his case, are widely different to those of any other great figure in ; I 56LXVI (February 20, 190*4-), 198. ' "^Supplement (February 131 190*4-), p. 109. 58XIX (July, 190*4-), * 4 - * 4 - 9 . | English literature, ancient or modern." In the article in which he made this statement, Clifford presented Conrad’s life up to that time in some detail, and like Alden, included (unlabeled) along with his facts a legend that Conrad as "a mere lad" had undertaken "a journey to Constantinople, his ambition being to fight for the Turks, then at war with Bussia., the hereditary enemy of his country Of the debts Conrad owed to his foreign heritage Clifford stated: Conrad spent some time debating whether to write in French or English; but admiration of the French stylists, of French delicacy and workmanship, of French subtlety, of French illu siveness and allusiveness, remained strong in him, and to this influence he owes not a little of the force, vividness, and the distinctness of his prose. . . . Add to this, that the author is a Sclav by birth and tradition, and that he possesses in an intensified form the sombre but strongly individual outlook of his people, and it will be recognized that he combines in his I person a mental equipment of so unusual a character that, backed ! as it is by literary instinct and ability of a very high order, j it could not fail to produce remarkable results.59 i ; Later, in a briefer article, also for American readers, Clifford wrote "It is a fact little flattering to the self-complacency of English-speaking peoples that one of the few writers now living j who is a master of over language is himself not an Anglo-Saxon but a j Sclav."60 j During 1911 Ford Madox Eueffer made further statements about Conrad’s foreignness. In a long appreciation of Conrad which he ! wrote for the English Beview, of which he was then editor and in which Conrad’s Some Beminiscences was soon to appear, Hueffer stated that, although Conrad’s "sense of Destiny" differed "in its ^North American Beview. CLXXVTI (June, 190*0, 8^2-^T* 6oHarper*s Weekly. XLIX (January l*f, 1905), 59. 127 means of expression" from that of the Greeks, "its intensity" was "always as great as theirs" perhaps because it was part of "a common 61 Oriental temperament." During the same year, in what was probably the first reference to Conrad in a printed book he said: I am perfectly certain that the two first-class purely imaginative writers of England to-day— Mr. Henry James and Mr. Joseph Conrad are the direct products of Turgeniev and Flaubert. . . , It is mortifying to have to,consider that each of these great writers is a foreigner. ^ Conrad himself developed a strong dislike for the emphasis some ! critics placed on what he called his foreignness. In 1907 he wrote ! Garnett: i t i j I've been so cried up of late as a sort of freak, an amazing I bloody foreigner writing in English. . . that anything I say ! will be discounted on that ground by the public— that is, if j the public, that mysterious beast, takes any notice whatsoever— j which I doubt. ! ! i iln January, 1908, he wrote Galsworthy, "I suppose there is something j ;in me that is -unsympathetic to the general public, . . . foreignness, L <,&*■ jI suppose. Comments on the serious tone of Conradfs writings similar to those which had been often made about his books published before 19C& i ! were also not uncommon in criticisms of the period from 190k until jmid-1912. In its review of Nostromo the New York Times stated that 6ht (December, 1911), 82. ^Memories and Impressions: A Study in Atmospheres (New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1911), p. 239. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 212. ^Life and Letters. II, 65. 128 the novel contained a "sense of underlying horror and dread" that one could "not easily forget," and the Atlantic Monthly affirmed that the occurrences in that novel were "all in deadly earnest." As an illustration of the seriousness, and effectiveness, of tone, the writer of the second review said, "In chapters seven and eight, there is an episode described with such genius that, reading it under a i l blazing noonday sun, I felt only the midnight darkness of Conrad's j „66 i tropic sea. j I The serious tone of The Mirror of the Sea was commented upon in I { ' ----------------------------------------------------------- ; several periodicals. The Spectator said, "It is too subtle, too j i profound, too exacting in its appeal to take the fancy of the casual J i ^ ! reader." ' The Outlook said, "The seriousness of his _/Conrad'_s7 thought impresses one with the profound moral meaning of everything 68 | he touches." In speaking of the "lovable nature" of Conrad that j i had been revealed in The Mirror of the Sea, the New York Times \ contrasted Conrad's character with that of the people of his previous ! books. "The creatures of his imagination have so often been I ] repellent, that one unconsciously grew to attribute their character- i - ! istics to Mr. Conrad himself," it said. . i i ! ^Supplement (December 21, 19(A), p. I i ^^XCVII (January, 1906), k-6. ! ; I 67XCVII (December 1, 1906), 889. 68LKXXIV (November IT, 1906), 679. ■ ^Supplement (November 10, 1906), p. 73^. j _ _ Several comments were made on the serious tone of The Secret Agent. S. Squire Sprigge declared in the Academy. "This is an excellent novel told in an appropriate maimer. It is terrible. . • 70 and convincing.” The Outlook called attention to the "notable tragic intensity" of the book. The Spectator gave careful attention both to the fact that in the book a murder was committed which could not be regarded as "justifiable either by logic or art" and to the "gruesome details in the pages describing the results of the 72 explosion." j Conrad seems to have attempted to lighten the tone of "The Duel," j 1 I I j the longest story in A Set of Six, a story published separately in | S the United States as The Point of Honor. But even this story was not regarded in all periodicals as lighter in tone than Conrad's earlier books. Although the Independent said, "The charm of the j tale consists in the lightness and humor with which it is told,"73 | the Dial called it "a grave comedy of cross-purposes keyed to a moderate pitch of dramatic intensity which is hardly changed from beginning to end,"7^ and the Nation admitted only that "touches of I quiet humor" were employed in delineating the principal characters 1 75 j of the story. ! 7°LXXIV (February 1, 1908), 413. ! 71LXXXVII (October 12, 1907), 309. 72xciX (September 21, 1907), 401. T3LXV (November 5, 1908), 1066. 71 hOLVI (April 16, 1909), 263. ; T5LKXXVII (October 15, 1908), 364. ! 130 In Under Western Eyes Conrad employed a seriousness of tone which was often remarked upon. The Athenaeum said, "His synthesis of a mood, a frame of mind, of emotional conditions, usually on the 7 6 side of tragedy, is something quite by itself in English fiction." Current Literature called the hook "a study in remorse, and as such, . . . appropriately keyed in the poignant pitch of personal anguish which made some of Mr. Conrad’s earlier volumes so compelling in their 77 appeal to the emotions," Perceval Gibbon said in the London Bookman that "the wonder and simplicity and tragedy of Russia" hovered over I 78 : the characters of the novel "like an atmosphere." The North Americaa! * Be view objected that the seriousness of the book was too "unre lieved."79 i Conrad’s seriousness of purpose, which was so often reflected in the tone of his writings, was so apparent by the time of publication of A Personal Becord in 1912 that several periodicals mentioned it in commenting upon that work. "He sees with a passion of wonder and records with a devotion almost fanatical," said the Spectatort "yet „80 all the time the strong hand of his sobriety is at the wheel. The Independent referred to Conrad as a "super--and somber--sailor- author." The Nation showed its preference for the seriousness , | 7^(October 21, 1911), pt. 2, p. k83. ! 77lh (February, 1912), 236. | 7®XLI (November, 1911), 9^. \ 79cxCIV (December, 19H), 936. 8oCIX (July 13, 1912), 61. 8lLXXII (March 28, 1912), 678. 131 usually ascribed to Conrad, by objecting to "Conrad*s self-professed attempt" to be conversational. "In the attempt to button-hole his reader," it complained, 'he assumes a jaunty air which is rather 82 distressing." The New York Times pictured him as "sitting beside his home fire, with grave, kind eyes resting upon the dog that his dead friend ^/Stephen Crane7 gave to his children— ... a noble and ,.83 memorable figure. Although comments on the seriousness of tone of his writings were rare in the major critical studies of his work published during ! the years from 1904 until mid-1912, in 1908 Conrad told Arthur Symons ; I how much he objected to overstress on this point. At that time 1 j Symons had sent Conrad a study of his work which had just been refused | i publication but which was later to be published in much the same form 1 in which Conrad saw it. (See below, pp. 227-28.) To Symons, Conrad objected: ' You say things which touch me deeply. ... I may say that there are certain passages which have surprised me. I did not know that I had "a heart of darkness" and an "unlawful" soul. Mr. Kurtz /in "The Heart of Darkness^/ had, and I have not treated him with the easy nonchalance of an amateur. Believe me, no man paid more for his lines than I have. By that I possess an inalienable right to the use of all my epithets. I did not know that I delighted in cruelty and that the shedding of blood was my obsession. 1 1 The fact is that I am really a much simpler person. Death j a fact, and violent death is a fact too. In the simplicity ! my heart, I tried to realize these facts when they came in. you think old Flaubert gloated over the deathbed of Emma, the death march of Matho, or the last moments of Felicie?^ 82 XCIV (March 7, 1912), 239- 83(February 18, 1912), 77* j ^Life and Letters. II, 73. I * is ! Of Do or The serious tone of Conrad's work of this period also impressed Ford Madox Hueffer, who wrote in 1911: For me Joseph Conrad is the finest of the Elizabethans. . . . His preoccupations are with death, destiny, and inscrutable and august force, with the cruel sea, the dark forests of strange worlds or the darker forests that are the hearts of our fellow men. . . . Conrad deals with darkness in most of his stories* without kindness, with a desperate sort of remorselessness. ^ In his review of Nostromo in 1904, Frederic Taber Cooper made an observation that received some attention from other critics during these years. In the following lines he cited Conrad as a writer \ I whose fiction made little appeal to women readers: j This is the era of the woman's novel and the matinee hero. ! And that is why, when you pick out the writers who are strong enough to picture love in its true proportions, in relation to the serious business of life, you find that you have picked out the writers of the strongest individuality. . . . There may be some women who read and enjoy the works of Joseph Conrad; but the present writer has not happened to meet them. ° In its review of the same novel the Reader complained, "The love „87 element is slight and in its development irregular. Conrad was also called to account for minimizing the love interest in The Secret Agent. "He is able to write of woman without investing her with a shred of romance," said the New York Times. "Therefore, he is cut off 1 88 from the wider popular favor." ■ Another factor which delayed Conrad's popular success was the I i fact that his writings of these years were slow to gain favor with any I 85 "Joseph Conrad," English Review, X (December, 1911), 70. 86Bookman, XX (November, 1904), 216-217. QlV (April, 1905), 619. 88 , . Supplement, XII (September 21, 1907), 562. 133 American critics of note. The attraction of Stephen Crane to Conrad's ■writings after Crane had read The Nigger of the Narcissus has already- been recounted (see pp.58-59). After the death of Crane in 1900, however, Conrad received little notice from American writers, except in reviews, until 1906. In that year ah article by John Albert Macy was published in the Atlantic Monthly, which was in many respects unfavorable to Conrad. "Eyes accustomed only to darkness and uncertain lights are in condition to be deluded by the phantoms of false dawn," Macy began; "it is therefore unwise to greet with too | 89 much enthusiasm the arrival of Mr. Joseph Conrad." Macy objected that Conrad "would not or could not tell his stories in more brief, steady and continuous fashion" and "was not instinctively a story- 1 teller.” He further said, "Many a writer of less genius than he surpasses him in method. .. . He has no gift of what Lamb calls a } bare narrative, — such a gift as was bestowed, say, on Frank Stockton, ! who never wrote a fine sentence." Macy particularly objected to Conrad's unorthodox narrative method because of the high standard Conrad had set for himself in his Preface to The Nigger of the Harcissus. After quoting from it the line, "My task. . . is before all to make you see," he complained: 1 A writer with ideals so high and strongly felt commits himself I for trial by exacting standards. It is necessary to remind ! Mr. Conrad that if a reader is to feel, he must hear distinctly; . and if he is to see, his eye must be drawn by interest in the j object, and it can look only in one direction at once. To this general complaint Macy added specific complaints that "the 89XCIII (November, 1906), 697. ! 13^ preliminary history of the silver mine" was "all out of proportion to the story of Nostromo”; that Lord Jim was "clumsily confused"; that in The Nigger of the Narcissus there were "conferences between two people in private which no third person could overhear," yet the narrative seemed "to be told in third person by one of the crew"; that in Typhoon, "where a steamer with deck almost vertical" was "plunging through a storm," the point of view was "shifted without warning" from the "simple dogged captain ... on the bridge" to the engine-room and "as suddenly back to the bridge again"; and that in I a final scene in An Outcast of the Islands, where it seemed to be "a. | I question which white man would kill the other after a dramatic meeting! i in the presence of a Malay heroine," each man stood "still before our eyes" and "radiated states of mind." Macy objected finally, "Conrad i has a mania for description. When anything is mentioned in the course of the narrative, though it be a thousand miles from the 1,90 present scene, it must be described. During the same year The Secret Agent was given a quite unfavorable review by Stewart Edward White, the next important American writer to criticize Conrad's work. White made objections to several features of the novel before he admitted that Conrad was one i of the great writers of the day. He objected to the characters of ! the novel as "either opera bouffe or treated as such." He objected J i I to the violence in the book because it did not "make tragedy inevitable from the first," as in "The Heart of Darkness." He 9°XCVIII (November, 1906), 698-700. 135 objected to the "long and rambling description of the old mother on her way to the poorhouse— excellent enough in itself," as having "absolutely nothing to do with the case." He objected that Comrade Ossipon's "intrusion into the big tragedies at the end" seemed to I him "a trifle irrelevant, not to say impertinent." And he further objected that Mr. Verloc held the title role in the novel "with difficulty" and that the Professor's "sole mission in life seemed to have been that of picturesqueness and the invention of an 91 1 explosive." ( J The unfavorable comments of Macy and White may have been I partially offset, in Conrad's own mind at least, by the praise Mary Austin accorded his work, when (accompanied by Herbert Hoover) she 92 paid him a long visit two years later, and by the interest James Gibbons Huneker evinced in Conrad's work a short time after that. Huneker wrote John Quinn, then his legal adviser, July 9, 1909, that "with Conrad" George Moore was "the big man" of the day "(Hardy being 93 ' out of the field)," and later told H. L. Mencken that he began to 94 correspond with Conrad in 1910. The correspondence actually began earlier, however, for Conrad received a letter from Huneker on I I 91 I Bookman. XXVI (January, 1908), 351-52. | : 9 2 i See pp. 106 and 108 of her essay on Typhoon, in A Conrad j 'Memorial Library, edited by George T. Keating (New York: Doubleday, Doran and Company, 1929) • ! 93 Letters of James Gibbons Huneker, edited by Josephine Huneker (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922), p. 98. 94 [ Letters of James G. Huneker. p. 105. I August 22, 1909, in which Huneker spoke of some of his own writings he was sending for Conrad's "perusal.’ ' In the letter Huneker declared, "I’ll wait for your new novel. What glorious tidings for 95 your admirers 1" Unfortunately for Conrad's reputation with American readers, Huneker, like Mary Austin, made only private expressions of his appreciation until it was too late to he of real service, or at least not before Conrad had achieved financial success as a 96 novelist. Conrad may also have taken some pleasure from the fact t ' that ex-President Theodore Roosevelt also thought of paying him a 1 I visit in 1910. He wrote Galsworthy early in 1910 that a friend of | jRoosevelt’s had "brought a formal message from the only Teddy," in j which Roosevelt made it.clear that he "would have invited himself" to 97 1 see Conrad if he had not been "too busy with official festivities. Except for the championship of Conrad in this country by I reviewers, usually all unnamed, there was indeed little extensive 1 favorable comment on his writings by Americans before 1912. Three !of them, however, did at least attempt to bring Conrad’s work to the i |attention of American readers as each successive book appeared. ^ William Morton Payne wrote a favorable review of The Children of the |Sea (see above, p. 38)> tut found little to praise in Romance (see ! 1 q *5 I j Letter from Huneker, in Twenty Letters. ^^Huneker*s appreciation of Conrad, "The Genius of Joseph Conrad" did not appear until August, 191^, in the Worth American Review. Mary Austin’s appreciation, "A Sermon in One Man," had appeared in Harper * s Weekly only six weeks earlier. ^ Life and Letters. II, 107* j 137: above, p. 103), so that even before the beginning of the period from 190*4- until mid-1912 the Dial1 s reviewer had criticized Conrad * adversely. In 190*4-, with the opening of the second period of Conrad’s career, Payne commented unfavorably on Nostromo. "Although readers will find in the book ample for their pains in perilsing it," he said, "they will often reach the point of exasperation at its lengthy analyses, its interminable dragging-out of incident, and its 98 frequent harking back to antecedent conditions." In the New York Times William L. Alden wrote very favorable I i reviews (see above, pp. 63, 70, and 71) of Lord Jim. "Heart of | » Darkness," and Youth before 190*4-, but like Payne, found Nostromo below the mark set by the earlier books. "Frankly, ’Nostromo' is to 1 ; | me, who yields to no one in admiration of Mr. Conrad’s genius, a 1 disappointment," he said; "there are superb things in the book, but they do not redeem it from a fault of tediousness.”99 Frederic Tabor Cooper, the third reviewer who attempted to bring j Conrad’s books to the attention of the American public, remained a 1 supporter of Conrad after 190*4- as well as before. Cooper’s first I ! review, of Falk in 1903 (see above, p. 7&), was favorable, and during | the period from 190*4- to mid-1912 he wrote in the Bookman favorable ! I . | j reviews of Nostromo, The Secret Agent, and Under Western Eyes as each ' i | 1 of those books appeared. Of Nostromo he wrote: j ! ! 98Dial, XXXVIII (February 16, 1905), 126, This review by Payne was the last he wrote of Conrad’s books. 99gUppiement (October 29, 190*4-), p. 735. Alden’s review of j Nostromo was also his last review of a book by Conrad. i 138 ]$rom whatever side you view it, Nostromo is too big, too complex, too full of dim uxtfathomed places to be easily or briefly epitomised. It has probably more actual story to it, of a dramatic sort, more of human greed and sordidness and knavery of human nature, than any of his previous books.10 In his review of The Secret Agent. Gooper defended Conrad against the charge that the book contained too much violence by carefully relating the events which led up to the explosion in Greenwich Park and by then declaring: The further consequences of this tragedy in the hands of a writer of smaller magnitude would have been melodrama. Mr. Conrad seizes the opportunity to show how logically and I inexorably nature, when not interfered with, can make the punishment for the crime.”101 j "Under Western Eyes will never rank with Lord Jim and just one or two other volumes that stand conspicuously as Mr. Conrad’s finest achievements,” he said in his review of that novel. ’ Hone the less, ! it is a , » . book . . . which no critical estimate of Mr. Conrad's 102 I life work could afford to ignore." ' Almost at the very end of this period Cooper rendered Conrad probably his greatest service, when he made this reply to Macy’s earlier objections: j Mr* Macy, while questioning the greatness of modern writers in : general somewhat dubiously suggests Conrad as one possible | | claimant. He extols Mr. Conrad’s lofty ideals, and then on I the ground that writers of such lofty standards must be judged j with exceptional rigidity, proceeds to devote a large part of j his article to picking flaws in the construction of his | author’s several stories, as measured by the pocket rule of j 100XX (November, 190*0, 216-218. 101XXVI (February, 1908), 670. 102XKXIV (December, 1911), ^2. 139~l cut-and-dried technique. The sum and substance of* what he has to say is to blame Conrad for not having done as other and lesser writers were contented to do before him— instead of seeking to discover how and why he has succeeded in being splendidly himself.103 But Cooper*s reply came very late. Even one year before, an American ; writer, after reading a short story by Conrad, expressed surprise when he discovered that the writer of the story had written eight books, that a bookseller whom he asked for some of them had never even heard of him, and that Conrad (though a Catholic) was not listed in lok , the Catholic Who*s Who for 1908. Even though recognition of Conrad*s powers as a fiction writer j i was slow in this country, Conrad was usually thought here, as in England, to possess one of the finest talents of his day. A close examination of this belief shows that, though many critics had ' 1 . I I praised him for his fine work up to 1904, a number of them made | I ' ! [ important objections to, or in some degree failed to comprehend, the 1 I writings of the period from 1901+ until mid-1912; or they sensed that 1 1 he was making important changes in the method of narrating his stories which they sometimes did not approve. In its review of Nostromo the New York Times spent some time | developing this thesis, which lay quite outside Conrad*s own jintentions: ! The events in the story are simply a parable upon the prevalent and erroneous belief that industrial prosperity and peace, and the opportunity to earn in safety individual j I I jOSeph Conrad," Bookman, XXXV (March, 1912), 6l. E. Curran, "A Master of Language," Catholic World, XCII j (March, 1911), 796. i 1^0 livings, are any guarantee to the ultimate contentment and progress of a people.^05 Difficult as it may be for a student of Conrad to see just how a reviewer of Kostroma could make such an interpretation of that novel, it would probably be just as difficult to see how Putnam's Magazine could say of The Secret Agent, "His unfailing humor is very audaciously employed. He makes fun of his characters while he is 106 leading them in the ways of tragedy.” Also somewhat beside the point were George Cram Cook's comments on Under Western Eyes in the : Chicago Evening Post. Unfortunately his entire review was developed from the misconception he expressed in these lines; ! Mr. Conrad writes of Russian politics not as a man who has dealt at first hand with the thing he is writing about, but as i one remembering what has been written. He writes of Eussian j revolutionary activity somewhat as Turgeniev wrote of it. , Unfortunately, man cannot live by Turgeniev alone. Not only is an imitation less impressive than an original, but the ! character of Russian revolutionary activity today is ; fundamentally different from the revolution activity of the ! time of Turgeniev. Mr. Conrad is not sufficiently conscious of the change. But such misunderstandings as these were probably less harmful to 1 Conrad’s reputation during these years than this statement about 1 ; Under Western Eyes which was made in the Saturday Review; ! If . . . the novel could have been completed on the plane of | its first remarkable part, Mr. Conrad might have challenged j 1 comparison on their own soil with almost any Russian. ... , But when he leaves that soil, when he goes from St. Petersburg j to Geneva, the poignancy and imagination of the earlier scenes ‘ ^'‘Supplement (December 31, 190*1-), p. 9^^* 106III (December, 1907), 370. ^^Chicago Evening Post (November 2k, 1911), p. 21. i*n * L oQ lose much of their distinction. During this period many critics noticed that Conrad was becoming more and more concerned with psychological problems, and as a result of this shift of emphasis, they said comparatively little about him as a creator of atmosphere. 0. H. Dunbar, in commenting upon Nostromo in the Critic.wrote that the novel "revealed to a reader in I I entire distinctness places and people whose reality he could never 109 afterwards for an instant doubt," a statement which showed his I I belief that Conrad had struck a balance between characterization and ; background, if not between characterization and atmosphere, in the j I novel. But the same critic immediately concerned himself with ; l ' | treating at length the "wonderfully differentiated characters" of the | j novel. In commenting upon Nostromo in the Athenaeum,another writer i i ! said nothing of Conrad*s use of his background to suggest an i I 1 | atmosphere, but commented upon "the wealth of characterization p | lavished upon innumerable. . . figures in this fine achievement." i Not until The Secret Agent was published, however, did many | critics see clearly the increasing psychological emphasis in Conrad*s j fiction. Sprigge, in the Academy, said, "The drawing of the ■ characters and the suggestion of the environments in which they move I I is completely skillful." He added that the characters were so well : i treated by Conrad as to make "elaborate explanations of their words I ; I 108CXII (October 1 *4 - , 1911), ^95. 109XLVI (April, 1905), 377- (November 5> 190*0, P"t* 2, p. 619. j 1 T 1 and actions unnecessary.” The New York Times stated: Conrad takes the human creature, composite of conscious and unconscious impulses, obscurely motived in the roots of being and the tangle of desires and associations made more complex but not controlled by that reason which is to most men as a pilot house whose wheel is inexpertly geared to the rudder— he takes this mysterious creature, analyzes the part of each impulse in the creature's external action, and then reconstructs the whole upon white paper out of mere printed language in such fashion that the stark humanity of it throws multitudinous detail— provided the reader has a fairly competent imagination— into the just perspective of real life.112 After devoting so much space to the psychological factors in the novel, neither of these critics of The Secret Agent commented upon the atmosphere of the novel. Another writer, in the Outlook, left less doubt that he had recognized Conrad's emphasis on the psychological aspects ,of the novel, when he said: In his latest story, 'The Secret Agent,' Conrad's real subject is not the plots of the Anarchists, the treachery of a spy among their number, the horror of a premature explosion by which an innocent and half-witted boy is blown to pieces, but rather the fine shades of temperament and intellectual process developed by the actors in these sensational scenes.1-^ Recognition of Conrad's increasing attention to the psychological I aspects of his fiction continued through reviews of A Set of Six and : Under Western Eyes. In Its review of the first of these volumes the i i Spectator said that Conrad "intentionally, no doubt," left "the j ' motive power of anarchism alone" and was interested chiefly in the I 11;LLXXIV (February 1, 1908), klb. •^^Supplement (September 21, 1907), p. 562. 1: L 3ixKXVII (October 12, 1*907), 309. "psychology of anarchism. In commenting upon Under Western Eyes. the North American Review said, "Mr. Conrad is far from being merely photographic, . . . since his work has unusual psychologic and 115 subjective qualities." The Athenaeum said of the same book, "Mr. Conrad reveals once again in his latest book the remarkable psycho- - L X ( 5 logical subtlety which has always characterized his work." The New York Times termed Under Western Eyes "a story of revolutionary activity treated psychologically rather than in the usual melodramatic „117 way. Not all periodicals that took notice of Conrad’s drift toward greater concern with psychology commented on it favorably though. Regarding Nostromo .the Reader objected: For an unusually long while Mr. Conrad leaves his wild country totally unpeopled, and when he does bring in his characters, they appear in great numbers and almost all at once, crowding s scant chance for anything \ The Spectator maintained that Conrad was "burdened with the wealth of j his equipment" in Nostromo because his characters "crowded upon him | demanding that each have his story told with the same patient realism, till the great motive is so overlaid with minor dramas" that 119 . it lost "much of its appeal." In its review of The Secret Agent, I the Nation said: ^ C I (August 15, 1908), 237* 1;l5cxiv (December, 1911), 938. 116(October 21, 1911), pt. 2, p. 483. 13-7Supplement (December 10, 1911), p. 8l8. (April, 1905), 619. 119XCIII (November 19, 190*0, 800.______________________________ 144! Nostromo was a rather heavy dose--. . • suggesting Browning's "The Ring and the Book." The Secret Agent is still less of a story. . . The events are so overlaid with description, analysis, and the study of the psychological side of the characters that the hook is hard to read.120 In its appraisal of the same novel, the Dial objected: We approach Mr. Conrad's 'The Secret Agent' with anticipations that are not fulfilled. Its programme of anarchists and bombs and detectives promises lively entertainment, but we get instead interminable descriptions and discussions of motive. The restilt is a good story completely smothered by analysis. We can hardly recall an equal disappointment since reading "The Princess Casamassima." If the reader will make up his mind beforehand to look for nothing but psychological interest, he will find it a-plenty.121 j In their reviews of Nostromo,the Reader and the Spectator ' 1 raised an objection that some other reviewers also made against that V novel, the objection that Conrad simply had too many people in his book for him to maintain a clear focus on the central figure. To admirers of Lord Jim this objection seemed especially valid. "Bad I Conrad made of it a story of, say thirty thousand words, dealing ; wholly with 'Nostromo* as 'Lord Jim* deals wholly with its hero," wrote W. L. Alden, "he would have given us a book with which no 122 | fault could be found." Similarly diapppointed, William Morton I i ! Payne said, "Nostromo is a very minor character as far as the main action of the story is concerned, but the one upon which Mr. Conrad 123 ( has concentrated his analytical powers." i 120LXXXV (September 26, 1907), 285. 121XLIII (October 16, 1907), 252. 1^2New York Times Supplement (October 29, 190^), 735* 123Pial, XXXVIII (February 16, 1905), 126. lk-5 Objections of this type were less harmful to Conrad's reputation during these years, however, than the not infrequent objections to the complexity of his narrative method. Occasionally such objections were coupled with objections to the increasing attention Conrad paid in his books to character motivation. Thus, in commenting upon Nostromo. the London Bookman objected only to Conrad's method of narration, which it felt was "art insufficiently concealed, . . .as in all his more elaborate romances." The story, it said, proceeded 12^ ' "by a series of leaps of narrative and bounds of parenthesis." i And William Morton Payne said of the same novel: | It is only upon the structural side that diction, characteri zation, and penetrative observation are conspicuously lacking, and it must be admitted that readers of "Nostromo," although they will find in the book ample pains in perusing it, will often reach the point of exasperation at its lengthy analyses, its interminable dragging-out of incident and its frequent i harking back to antecedent conditions.^5 j In its review of Nostromo. the Atlantic Monthly said: 1 i You have to pay close attention. Things happen which you do not fully understand. The story is involved, the movement seems to go backward; it is clumsy. Then suddenly you dis cover that this is his method, the most extraordinary blending I of mystification and revelation. Episode by episode, he j positively begins by telling you the end of each adventure, then at his leisure, how it came about.126 iEven Cooper, one of Conrad's most avid admirers, commenting upon ! i what he called the style in Nostromo, objected that though ! i i |"wonderful," the novel did not "make easy reading." He described its j 1 pL. XXVII (February, 1905), 221. 125Dial, XXXVIII (February 16, 1905), 126. 126XCVII (January, 1906), U-6. effect as follows: It resembles nothing so much as the depth, the mystery, the riotous luxuriance of a tropical forest. There are pages and chapters where you move ahead cautiously, peering ahead at the vague forms of thoughts that you see suggested; and then, suddenly, there comes an open spot, illuminated with the sunshine of per fectly clear mental pictures, crowding tumultuously upon you; a flash and flare of rainbow colouring seems to streak the page with scarlet and purple and gold. That in brief is an epitome of Conrad’s art: to keep you at one time groping in the dark, shrink ing from unguessed horrors dimly seen through fog and mist; and the next moment to blind you with the unexpected flood of mental light. -*-27 Similar comments were made about later books of this period. In his review of The Secret Agent. Desmond McCarthy said: One of the principal characteristies of Mr. Conrad’s work hitherto is that It has been cumulative in method. He has attained his ends by piling up the effect. In this book he j is more concentrated than he has ever been before.1^® jThe Spectator complained that "digressions which interrupt the march Iof the narrative in a tantalizing manner were contained in The Secret Agent. Two American periodicals contrasted the simple narrative structure of The Point of Honor with Conrad’s other work of this period. "The tale is swifter in movement and holds the attention better than ’The Secret Agent* or ’Nostromo,*" said the Nation. I "It will therefore be more pleasing to readers who like a naked 130 |story, stripped of accessories." And of the same book the Dial said: 12^Bookman, IX (November, 1904), 217. 128Albany Beview (London), II (November, 1907), 231. 129XCIX (September 21, 1907), 401. 13°LXXXVII (October 15, 1908), 364. Mr. Conrad works upon a small canvas in 'The Point of Honor,' and the product more than .Justifies the self-imposed limita tions. His longer hooks are often hard to read because of their diffuseness and over-indulgence in analysis, but this one offers no such impediment to the reader's sustained satisfaction. 3 i In commenting upon the same story the Athenaeum appraised Conrad's j narrative method as follows: "Conrad's work is pungent, but not terse; severely concentrated, yet too analytic to be remarkable for its brevity. Its vividness is due to a steady, emulative effect 132 rather than a series of flashes." i Conrad's heterodox method of telling a story {even about himself) was observed in reviews of A Personal Becord. The Dial mentioned the j i 333 j I "agreeably hap-hazard fashion of the book"; the Independent said j I 1 1 that it was "not altogether an orderly autobiography"; 3 the Nation I 1 1 stated that the reminiscences in the book were "of casual and frag- 135 mentary sort"; and the Athenaeum mentioned the "wilful discursive- 136 * ness" of the book. The North American Review maintained that the book contained ( all the flaws as well as all the splendors and wonders of Conrad's writing. He leads us hither and yon, from his middle-aged life at sea back to his early boyhood; he ; 131XLV1 (April 16, 1909), 263. , 132 (August 29, 1908) pt. 2, p. 237. This story was entitled I "The Duel" in the English volume, A Set of Six. 133LII (March 1, 1912)*, 172. 13NsXVI (March 28, 1912), 678. I : 135XCIV (March 7, 1912), 238. ! 136(February 3, 1912), pt. 1, p.l2fc. 148 lingers over old memories and traditions of his ancestral home and describes several generations of his family. The Spectator, believing that Conrad's narrative method gave no relief, objected: So constant is the pressure that there is apt to result a certain monotony. The reader begins to sigh for a little light and shade, for a louder or a softer stop, for some variation of the almost dogged brilliance which is Mr. Conrad's medium. But no variation comes, for the writer is as incapable of forcing the note as he is of underpitching it.138 Along with the recognition of the complexity of Conrad's narrative method and probably because of it, the notion persisted that Conrad was a difficult novelist to read and probably one who iwould not attract a wide circle of readers. The Independent, for | example, began its review of Nostromo by stating: ! Conrad is one of those authors who, like Browning and j Whitman in poetry and Meredith and James in prose, 1 fascinate a certain elect circle of admirers, while others ' find them difficult to understand and tiresome to read. ; Each successive volume widens the chasm between Conrad lovers and Conrad hater s.-*-39 i 1 The Spectator said, "It /Nostromo~7 is not a book that the casual ireader will appreciate. . , . But it is a book which will well repay i ~ i 4 o those who give it the close attention it deserves." In his review of Nostromo, Alden wrote, "There is a vast deal in the book, t 'and in nearly every way it compels our admiration; but as a whole I 137CXCV (April, 1912), 569. 138CIX (July 13, 1912), 60-61. 139lviii (March 9, 1905), 557. ^XCIII (November 19, 1904), 801. 149 l4l fancy that most of Mr. Conrad's readers will find it tiresome." Tlae Spectator made a similar objection to The Mirror of the Sea. saying, "It is not a book for which we can foretell a ready sale. It is too subtle, too profound, too exacting in its appeal to take the . . 1^2 fancy of the casual reader. Several objections were made to the sub-title of The Secret Agent— "A Simple Tale." The Spectator said, "When Mr. Conrad calls his story 'a simple tale,* he is perhaps overestimating the 14-3 intelligence of the average reader." The Athenaeum said: Conrad uses the sub-title in good faith, yet, as a fact, the book is far more than a simple one, even for the expert; while for the average reader of novels there is nothing simple about it. The subtlety of his mental processes, the keenness of his artistic senses, have placed him further away from the great reading public— if infinitely nearer to the select few who have trained faculties of appreciation— than many a writer of less worth. . . . The writer of a *simple tale' ought to show some regard for the simple reader, if not in the essentials of his story, certainly in the details of its construction. Mr. Conrad's lordly disregard of such an element as time for instance, is a little unkind to the simple reader. . . . The writer's craftmanship is such that the critical reader excuses such odd construction; but what of the good soul who set out to read for the story alone, as many will?!^ "To call this story A Simple Tale is a tortured misnomer," exclaimed i the Independent. "Between the covers intrigues, anarchistic plots, bomb explosions, robberies, murders, and suicides revel. Thomas 145 Jefferson himself could find no simplicity here." ^""hllew York Times Supplement (October 29^ 1904), p. 735* lk2XCVlI (December 1, 1906), 889. -^XCIX (September *21, 1907), 400. -'-^(September 28, I907), pt. 2, pp. 361-62. -^LXIV (January 9, 1908), 105. 150 i Probably because many of them were written by his own friends for the purpose of extolling his powers as a writer, the longer articles on Conrad during this period included only infrequent mention of the complexity of his narrative method. One notable exception to ! i this trend was the article by John Macy, whose opinion has already been treated. Hueffer, then an ardent admirer of Conrad's work, in 1911 defended him as follows against the charge that his method was unduly complex: I have heard it said that his books are too long; that his ! elaboration is over-great. But that is the case only for minds j very hurried or temperamentally out of tune with this author. | For myself I can only say that not one of his works has ever seemed tedious. I like one subject more than another, but the ! keen pleasure of observing the incidents, the certainty that every incident--that every word, however superfluous they may appear, will in the end show necessary and revelatory— this j pleasure I am never without. j I E. F. Curran, in his rather lengthy appreciation of Conrad which j i appeared in the Catholic World during the same year, praised Conrad 1 for his cavalier attitude toward the "rule of three /unities^," at the same time calling him "a living contradiction of their theories lh7 for success in literature." In 1912 Frederic Taber Cooper admitted I : that there was "hardly any rule of technique" that Conrad did not I |"deliberately break" when he chose to do so, and that a "reproach ! j frequently made against him" was that he followed "no logical j 'development of a story," but went "zigzagging back and forth, from | east to west, from past to future, apparently quite without purpose or | ^ ^English Beview. X (December, 1911), 82. ^TXCII (March, 1911), 801. 1511 I ! orientation." Against such, a "reproach" Cooper offered this defense: There are certain types of genius that must work according to their inborn nature: and it happens that Mr. Conrad shares with the spider the genius of the zigzag method, and by the help of it spins fabrics quite as marvellous and inimitable. He cannot help himself; his mind works that way. 1^8 When Conrad started to write Nostromo in 1903, he began a period in which, as already shown, critics were to regard his writing as increasingly complex. He himself may not have been aware of the fact that two important changes were taking place: first, he ceased to rely on memory as almost the sole source of his fiction published between 1904 and mid-1912, and second, he did not use the sea as the setting for his fiction of this period. j , The importance to Conrad of memory as a source of material for 1 } fictional treatment was not mentioned by any of his critics until i1916, at which time Hugh Walpole observed: I - : It may happen often enough that an author's artistic life is of no importance to the critic and that his dealing with it is merely a personal impertinence and curiosity, but with the life of Joseph Conrad the critic has something to do, because again and again, this writer deliberately evokes the power of personal reminiscence, charging it with the burden of his philosophy and the creation of his characters.-^9 John D. Gordan also stated later that Conrad depended "for his i 150 I subjects preponderantly upon his memory." However, neither of these writers recognized— or stated, if he did recognize— that for a j ' period of almost nine years (from 1904 until mid-1912) Conrad wrote j I ^Bookman. XXXV (March, 1912), 63-64. j ^ ^Joseph Conrad (London: Nisbet and Company, 1916), p. 7. Joseph Conrad: The Making of a Hovelist (Cambridge: Harvard j University Press, 19^-0), p. 31» I 152 fiction that had to he created almost solely from his imagination. To see Conrad’s drift toward use of imagination alone as the source of his fiction, one has to review his writings published i during the years 1895 through 1903. In writing his first two books, : Almayer's Tolly (1895) and An Outcast of the Islands (1896), Conrad used both memory and imagination as sources.1-^ He wrote his first book without a clear intention of becoming a professional writer; and since he wrote it slowly as a labor of love, he did not feel deeply the difficulties of composition with imagination as an important j source. When he began to write An Outcast of the Islands, a novel I ■■■■■■■ | in which more imagination had to be used, the anguish of writing J became quite apparent to him. Letter after letter to Garnett 152 ! reflected this. Later, as he was writing his third novel manu script, The Be3cuer, he was forced to rely even more heavily upon his imagination, and he finally had to put the unfinished work aside i for a period of twenty-four years. His letters to Garnett during I898 to 1898 showed his difficulties. On June 19, 1896, he wrote: Since I sent you that first page (on the eleventh of the | month) I have written one page. Just one page. I went about thinking and forgetting--sitting down before the blank page to find that I could not put one sentence together. ... I feel ; I nothing clearly. And I am frightened when I remember that I have to drag it all out of myself.-3 -^ On August l4th he again wrote, ’ ’ Upon my word X hate every line I j t f I ! 1^Conrad’s dependence on these two sources is treated at length 1 by Gordan, Joseph Conrad, Chapter I. • ^ - ^Letters from Conrad, pp. 3-17 ♦ 1 ^Letters from Conrad, p. 37» I write. I wish I could tackle Hie Rescuer again. I live in fear that is worse than mortal. But I have told you all that. Similar expressions occur in letters to Garnett during the summer of Conrad’s honeymoon in Brittany. In fact, Garnett recounts a conversation that occurred as late as September, 1898, which shows that Conrad was still trying to go forward with the novel, although his creative 155 anguish was extreme. Finally, however, he put the manuscript aside in favor of hooks that were more easily written. Slowly, Conrad discovered the comparative ease of writing from memory. Many of the stories that later appeared in Tales of Unrest (1898) were largely the result of imaginative effort, hut since the effort in each case was not too long sustained, such efforts did give him respite from the larger imaginative conception that was finally to he published in 1920 as The Rescue. In writing The Nigger of the Narcissus (1898) he discovered how easy writing almost entirely from (memory could he, and from that time forward, omitting the collahora- jtions with Ford Madox Hueffer, he had a tendency to follow a hook ihased largely on imagination hy a hook hased largely on memory. ( His difficulty with Lord Jim (1900), a hook in which he used a | familiar setting hut still had to imagine many of the events of the 1 ! narrative, was attested hy the following statement hy Mrs. Conrad: » j It was the days, weeks, even months, when he could not write a line, that held for us the greatest worry and stress. Many , times I have tried to coax him to put the work out of his mind I5J4. Letters from Conrad, p. 4-7• ■ ^ - ' ’ - ' ’ introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xxiv. . . . completely and come with me for some little jaunt, urging that the rest would he good for his mind. Conrad could never he persuaded.156 In writing the three stories that comprise the volume Youth (1902) and the longest of the stories in Typhoon and Other Stories (1903) Conrad [ 1 again relied heavily upon memory and hence wrote more easily. The force of memory as the source of "Youth" was so strong that Conrad admitted to Wells, "The feeling which induced me to write that story . . . poked its head through the narrative in a good many places."157 i In writing Nostromo (190*0 and its sequel The Mirror of the Sea J (1906), Conrad seems almost consciously to have adopted the plan of following a work of imagination by a work of reminiscence or a short ! story in which imagination did not have to be long sustained. ! 1Nostromo, a novel based almost entirely upon imagination, is in fact ! ia great tour-de-force among masterpieces of imaginative literature. 1 1 J as Conrad said: t 1 In the whole world of Costaguana (the country you may remember : of my seaboard tale), men, women, headlands, houses, mountains, I town, campo, there was not a single brick, stone, or grain of „ sand of its soil I had not placed in position with my own hands. The great effort it cost Conrad he made clear in the well-known jreference to the "twenty months" during which he neglected the "common i f \ ^ ^Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him (New York: Doubleday, Page and j Company, 192o), p. 110. "^'■^Georges Jean-Aubry, Joseph Conrad: Life and Letters (New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 1927), I, 2* 4 - 6. 1^Some Reminiscences. (London: Eveleigh Nash and Company, 1911), 1 .p. 176. 159 Some Reminiscences, p. 173• ~ * ~ ^Life and Letters, I, 169. 155 joys of life that fall to the lot of the humblest on this earth" and had "’wrestled with the Lord’ j/interior quotation marks Conrad% £J for 159 hi3 creation." ^ Even before the manuscript was completed and ready for publication, however, Conrad availed himself of the antidote to creating from imagination he had found--that of creating from memory. "And yet at the same time that he was writing Nostromo. and almost by way of distraction," wrote Jean-Aubry later, "he was able to compose several chapters of The Mirror of the Sea. With the appearance of The Mirror of the Sea in 1906, the drift toward separation of the two sources of inspiration was complete. For some reason, though, Conrad seemed to feel that he should not use memory I i as a source for his fiction, but only as a source of autobiographical reminiscence. Thus the long fictional works--The Secret Agent (1907) I and Under Western Eyes (l91l)--of the period from 1904 through mid- J 1912 which followed Nostromo were based almost entirely upon | imagination. The stories in A Set of Six (1908) were also created chiefly from imagination. Only one story of the six, "The Brute," - made use of materials that were quite familiar to Conrad, in this case only in that this was the story of a ship. [ Just why Conrad felt during this period that he must not base ! t | his fiction on memory is not clear. It is clear, however, that like ' I I the work of the period up to 1904, his fictional work of these years f , was quite complex, if we are to accept the statements of most critics of it. Conrad seems, therefore, to have made a serious mistake in neglecting the promptings of memory during this period. The possi bility that this source was exhausted by the end of 1903 can be ruled out, since he was to return to it as a source of the fiction published after mid-1912. In fact, even as late as 1917 be was to publish The Shadow Line, largely an autobiographical account of experiences during his first command, and in 1919 be was to publish The Arrow of Gold, a novel based largely on experiences he had had in the early 1870’s as a youthful Carlist. Conrad's neglect of memory as the source of his fiction was closely allied to his shift of settings from the sea to the land I | during the years 1904 until mid-1912. By 1904 he had achieved a | reputation with his critics as a fine writer of stories with the j sea or the tropics as their settings, and although he had not I 1 achieved a satisfactory material success with such stories, it does 1 seem now that he may have turned his back on the sea too soon. Only I ! once from 1904 until mid-1912 did Conrad use the sea as a setting for 1 fiction, and then only for one of the shortest stories in the volume ■ A Set of Six. I During this period critics of his fictional work often commented | on this change. Some of them noticed the change with regret. "There 1 are many fine pictures of the sea in the book,” wrote the London Bopfrrnan of Nostromo. "but we confess to thinking Mr. Conrad has reached his highest mark when, as in the unforgettable 'Youth,’ he i has been content with a comparatively small canvas" devoted exclusively 161 1571 to the sea." Stewart Edward White, in his review of The Secret Agent, said: Mr. Joseph Conrad renders difficult the task of reviewing The Secret Agent by already having written Lord Jim, Youth, and the rest of his splendid titles. By them we know what he can do. Therefore we cannot dismiss The Secret Agent with a few well-chosen words to the effect that it is a readable story with flashes of humour and passages of gripping realism. Of the same novel Current Literature said: Those who come to Joseph Conrad’s latest novel with the expectation of finding in it the peculiar ’note* that has given him, until now, his distinctive place amont English- I speaking writers, are sure to be disappointed. It has but distant kinship with his masterly sea-stories. Still later, Frederic Taber Cooper remarked that the subject of Under Western Eyes "stamped the volume as distinctly a new departure on the part of Conrad," but he then declared, "It will never rank with Lord Jim and just one or two other volumes that stand conspicuously as l6^ Mr. Conrad's finest achievements. A number of periodicals expressed admiration for Conrad's writings about the sea. by praising his reminiscences of it in The Mirror of the Sea and A Personal Record. The Spectator attributed the high quality of Conrad * s style in The Mirror of the Sea to "the exactness and vividness of the phraseology of the sea" which he knew so well.1^ The Outlook praised it as a book which revealed to its 1^1XXYII (February, 1905), 221. Bookman, XXVI (January, 1908), 531. XLIV (February, 1908), 223. • ^Bookman, XXXIV (December, 19H), MUL-1+2. l65XCVII (December 1, 1906), 889. -- readers "the romance, the greatness, of the 'sea that plays with men till 1heir hearts are broken, and wears stout ships to death. ' The Nation declared, "However he JCowca.£J may hate the enchantress the sea, this man is subject to her glamour, and able to impart the | 167 ; sense of it as few men have been." The Literary Digest exclaimed: j Mr. Conrad understands all the moods of the sea, and his high gift of imagination, held in abeyance by a clear, rational perception, has enabled him to impart a vivid idea of the wonder and charm of the Infinite as expressed by its most potent symbol, the ocean. . . . His latest book will compare with the best work he has done. He is literally in his element in 'The 1 Mirror of the Sea,' and those of his admirers who have been asking for a book dealing solely with the sea now have their wish granted j * The Academy praised the book as "a sensitive appreciation of the whole i art of seamanship, an imaginative reading of the varying moods of the 169 ' sea." Such positive appreciations of this work as a sea-piece, along with the almost complete absence of adverse criticism (which, 1 as already shown, was not uncommon in reviews of the fiction of this ! period), indicate that the reputation Conrad had gained by 190*4- as a writer of sea stories was a reputation he was expected to live up to in his later fiction. 1 1 When A Personal Record, Conrad's second book of reminiscence, 1 [ was published in 1911, this notion was still apparent in some ' periodicals. "There can be no question but that this man from inland I 1 I 4 I 166 LXXXIV (November 17, 1906), 678. ^LXXXIII (November 1, 1906), 375. 1 l68XXXIII (November 10, 1906), 685. l69LXXI (October 20, 1906), 39^- 159 Poland has, in rare degree, an understanding of the ocean, and the ability to call up in his readers* imaginations sea and ship and 170 seaman," wrote the Independent. The Worth American Be view praised the book for "those glowing and gorgeously colored bits that give the distinctive quality to his work— echoes of the sea, the wind's ways, 171 hints of an almost religious literary creed.” And the New York Times called Conrad "the English seaman with the mark of good and 172 faithful servant well won and written fair." 1 The importance of Conrad's role as a writer about the sea was frequently stressed during this period by writers of articles on Conrad. Macy, for example, in his study which included so much 1 adverse criticism of Conrad, admitted that Conrad possessed two gifts— i 'his "sea experience and cultivation of style.Another writer, whose article followed Macy’s by a few months, wrote of Conrad’s then most recent work. The Mirror of the Sea: ! * -------------------- I In no book. . . is Conrad's peculiar quality felt more strongly J than In his latest, 'The Mirror of the Sea'— a series of i chapters, descriptive, reminiscent and frankly autobiographical. ; Here, sailor-fashion, he tells of the love of his shipj not the I modern thing of steel and fire, but the old white-winged j feminine creature who could 'put her head under her wing’ and ! 'ride out a gale with wave after wave passing under her ■ breast.’ The very thrill of his experiences in gales at sea • Conrad communicates to his readers. ' i ; 1 i WlXXII (March 28, 1912), 678. j 171CXCV (April, 1912), 569- \ 172(February 18, 1912), p. 78. I t 173Atlantic Monthly, XCVIII (November, 1906), 7^1• •^"Joseph Conrad--a Unique Writer of the Sea," Current I Literature, XLII (January, 1907), 58-59. [ ....* ” i6o In 1912 three critics commented on Conrad *a importance as a writer of books with the sea as their setting. "I believe that no other writer has surpassed Conrad in the picturing of those two fields l | of human endeavor—-the endlessly variable sea, and the tropics," wrote j Edwin Bjorkman, "where life and death, fierce passion and dreamy languor, are always found close together, like twin kernels within 175 a single shell." Cooper, during the same year, wrote: It is true that Mr. Conrad is a sort of literary amphibian; ! j he is almost as much at home when writing of the land a.s of j j the sea. Hone the less, the la.tter is his true abode, and his 1 I best pages are those that deal with ships and harbours, docks ! j and quays, sluggish tropical rivers, swarming water fronts, and all the motley crowds, the flaring colours, the babel of J speech, the unnumbered and indistinguishable mixture of I racial types and nationalities to be found nowhere on earth j 1 save where land and sea touch shoulders. Yet, if one were j making a prediction, it would be safest to say that Mr. Conrad, j will live longest in his pages of life on ships in mid-ocean. ' ; In an article which appeared under the title "Joseph Conrad and Sea j I I ^Fiction" at the very end of this period, Stephen Reynolds developed at I length the thesis that behind much of Conrad’s writing lay the "seaman's test." "Behind his psychological windings and subtleties, behind his brooding impressionism and keen realism," he said, "one I almost always comes upon the strong working ideal that belongs to ’ British sea-faring tradition. When he judges his characters, that is 1 his final test— the seaman's." Reynolds asserted that such figures 1 in Conrad's works as Lord Jim, Willems, and even both Winnie and 175 Joseph Conrad: Master of Literary Color," American Monthly Review of Reviews, XLV (May, 1912), 559* -*-7^"Joseph Conrad," Bookman, XXXV (March, 1912), 69. " l6l] Mr. Verloc failed the "seaman’s test" of whether or not the individual was "all right." In each case the failure of the individual to pass the test, said Reynolds, was the factor which provided "the unity of the story."1^ j i The belief that Conrad wrote best when he wrote of the sea was also not uncommon among literary men of Conrad’s day. To most of the men who had followed Conrad’s literary career from its inception, The Mirror of the Sea probably marked the highest point in his career as a writer. Edward Garnett wrote Conrad that he should be "very proud" i I of the book. "It stands quite by itself. There is nothing like it ! I anywhere," he said. "You are a lucky man. The Gods have endowed you *j »yQ with rare gifts." John Galsworthy wrote Conrad: The Mirror of the Sea is magnificent. It ranks with your very finest work, and I think the episode in Initiation the finest thing you have ever written. I wept over it seated in a public seat and surrounded by natives. . . . It is the epic of the sailing ship. My heartfelt admiration goes out to you. I’m certain Edward, Hudson and all the faithful will be bowled over I by it.^79 To Garnett, Galsworthy wrote: I The Mirror of the Sea by Joseph Conrad is one of the finest books of our time; and in it an episode called ’Initiation* ! the very finest thing written on the sea in our day. Do you like the book? o1’3 0 80 awfully glad. I think it will do him ! a lot of good.-^® : 17T ! Quarterly Review. CCXVII (July, 1912), I60-I65. | ^^Letter from Edward Garnett, dated October 20, 1906, in Twenty Letters. 179 Letter from John Galsworthy, in Twenty Letters. T. 80 Letters from John Galsworthy, ed. Edward Garnett (London: Jonathan Cape, 193^), p« 122. 162 Like Galsworthy, E. V. Lucas confessed to Conrad that he had wept as he read the book. "Confound you, dear man, you have made me so restless," he wrote Conrad. "I don't know what to do. This 101 tedious solid land. . . ./Ellipsis Lucas's7H Henry James wrote Conrad: The book ... is a wonder to me really— for it's so bringing home the prodigy of your past experiences: bringing it home to me more personally and directly, I mean, the immense treasure and the inexhaustible adventures. No one has known— for intellectual use— the things you know, and you have, as the artist of the whole matter, an authority that no one has approached. You knock about in the wide waters of expression like the raciest and boldest of privateers. . . . Nothing y6u have done has more in it. . . . You stir me, in fine, to amazement and you touch me to tears, and I thank the powers who so mysteriously let you loose with such sensibilities, into such an undiscovered country— for sensibility.-1 -^ j Wells also wrote Conrad his admiration of The Mirror of the Sea in !these lines: i I ! I've been reading first in and then through from beginning to 1 end your delightful (it's the right word) talk of seas and \ winds and ships. ... A fine book. . . ^ellipsis Wells% £J i the sea under my eyes most wonderfully. I shall for all ray „ j life be the wiser for it. I see better as I go to and fro. ^ I |In what may be the only letter he ever wrote Conrad, Kipling said: | ^ What a book of the Sea it is! I took it when it came in and sailed about on it till bed-time. Of course I know the description of the winds which I think almost as splendid as the description of the darkness in "Typhoon," but I read and i re-read it all and I thank you for it heartily and gratefully. Letter from E. V. Lucas, dated October 9, 1906, in Twenty ■ letters. ^^Letter from Henry James, dated November 1, 1906, in Twenty Letters. ■^Letter frQm H. G. Wells, dated "1906," in Twenty Letters. 163 It must mean even more to a man who has used the sea under sails than it does to me— and that is saying a heap. Arnold Bennett may have been the only one of Conrad' s avid j admirers among men-of-letters who did not regard The Mirror of the Sea as the zenith of Conrad's work as a writer. In a letter to Conrad in 1912 he accorded high praise to Nostromo and other books published from 1904 until mid-1912. Of Nostromo he said/'When I first read it I thought It the finest novel of this generation (bar none), and I am still thinking so." He admitted that he could only "respectfully retire from comparison" when it came to doing such work as "the ! quiet domestic scenes behind the shop in ,The Secret Agent.'" Of Conrad's last two books of this period he said: What I chiefly like in your books of "Berniniscences" is the , increasing sardonic quality of them— the rich veins of dark and glittering satire and sarcasm. We want a lot more of that in English literature. There was a lot of it, too, in the latter half of "Under Western Eyes."1^5 Bennett had the following objections to The Secret Agent, however, , which he privately committed to his journal on September 25, 1907: ! A certain amount of reading has been done lately. Conrad's | The Secret Agent. A sort of sensationalism sternly treated j on the plane of realistic psychology. A short story written I out to the length of a novel. Nothing but a single episode told to the last drop. The Embassy scenes did not appear to me to be quite genuine, but rather a sincere effort to imagine events for which the author had nothing but psychological data | of a general order. ... The final scenes between the wife j and the anarchist missed fire in their wildness, not in the i ■ conception but in execution. On the whole, coming after j Nostromo, the book gives a disappointing effect of slightness. j 18k Letter from Rudyard Kipling, in Twenty Letters. ^^Letter from Arnold Bennett, in Twenty Letters. 186 The Journal of Arnold Bennett (New York: The Literary Guild, ! 1933) , pp. 262-63. | 1641 Other literary men also raised objections to Conrad’s fiction of the period. It is true, of course, that many of them continued to express their admiration for Conrad’s -writings as they were published. Conrad’s letters reveal, for example, that Garnett praised The Secret 187 Agent and the stories in A Set of Six; that, in Conrad’s words, X88 Galsworthy found "The Duel," to be "tolerable"; that Lucas, 189 Graham, and Colvin praised The Secret Agent; and that Symons's praise of Under Western Eyes was, in Conrad’s words, "the only real 190 satisfaction" he got from the work. But there were indications ; * that literary men who had admired Conrad's earlier work, particularly j I -his sea fiction, were not as prone to appreciate his fiction of the ; J years from 19C& to mid-1912. Galsworthy complained to Conrad by :letter of certain "diffuseness" and "tricks of style" which he found j in The Secret Agent and "certain things" in Under Western Eyes which j | I j Conrad felt "it would be an unprofitable occupation to attempt to 1 1 191 explain to him. Conrad objected to Galsworthy that Garnett was slow in telling him what he thought of The Secret Agent, and his letters seem to indica.te that Henry James never acknowledged a copy ! 192 ,of that work that he had sent to him. During this period, I l87Life and Letters.II. 71, 75, and 89. : 1 PtPt ' Life and Letters, II, 62. "The Duel" was the title given in England to the final story in A Set of Six, the story which had been j separately published in the United States as A Point of Honor. l8^Life and Letters. II, 56, 60, and 92. 1 ^^Life and Letters. II, 137* ' ^^Life and Letters, II, 37, 135. 192 ' Life and Letters, II, 55, 58* j l65~l i i D. H. Lawrence, who had become a protege" of Edward Garnett, stated what many of Conrad’s older admirers were probably beginning to feel. "Of course Conrad should always do the beautiful magic atmospheres," 193 he wrote Garnett. "What on earth turned him to Bazumov?" Most literary men of the day did not realize their disappointment in Conrad’s work of this period until later though, and thus the realization must be considered in a later chapter of this study. In summary, it is apparent that Conrad had by 190^ gained critical recognition as one of the foremost writers in English of his | 1 day. He continued to enjoy this reputation during the years from i I 190^ until mid-1912. Moreover, he enjoyed a reputation during these ! years as one of the most serious and sincere of artists, whose work I | showed clearly the stamp of originality. ; | i But there were evidences that his work of this period was not as j highly regarded by many critics as his work of the period from 1895 1 (through 1903. His originality was sometimes stressed (or possibly j over-stressed) by critics as "unique" or "unusual." Such stress, ! when added to the interest in his "foreignness," as he himself 1 termed it, which had indeed been characteristic of Conrad criticism since about 1898, probably did little to increase the number of his readers. To this feature of Conrad criticism during these years ^ ( must also be added the continuing conception of his writings as | | predominantly serious or sombre in tone, a tone which reflected the I author's own serious view of life. Furthermore, Conrad did not 193The Letters of D. H. Lawrence, ed. Aldous Huxley (New York: uThe Viking Press, 1932), p. 32.______________________________________ o ' .......................... ' .................... " l 66 usually cater to the popular* taste of this time hy -writing of love between men and women. In fact, during these years he was increasingly regarded as a writer who was unable to characterize women effectively, j Conrad’s reception by the leading critics in the United States from 1904 until mid-1912 was also largely unfavorable. The article by Macy, which appeared in 1906, was in most respects adversely I critical of Conrad’s writings up to that time— even of his writings ! of the years before 1904. To the harmful effect of Macy’s article on* Conrad's reputation with American readers must be added the i further harm done by Stewart Edward White's unfavorable review of The Secret Agent in 1907. Moreover, among American reviewers who j compared Conrad’s work of these years with that published before 1904, ' only one, Frederic Taber Cooper, wrote favorably of it. Others tended to find it below the standard set by Conrad’s earlier work. j « . 1 The interest of Mary Austin and James Huneker in Conrad’s work, iwhich dated from about the middle of this period, might have been i I |expected by Conrad to result in published appreciations of his work I by these writers, but they offered no help of this type -until 1914, !after Conrad was almost assured of popular success. Frederic Tabor i Cooper was thus the only American critic who published a laudatory ! appreciation of Conrad during the years 1904 until mid-1912. Affairs might have improved for Conrad in spite of tardy I . recognition of his work in this country during these years if his \ I I work had not also received many adverse criticisms in England. ! Occasionally a reviewer failed entirely to tinder stand what Conrad : was attempting to do in a particular book of this period. Often J 167 ' Conrad’s work, especially his novels of these years, was criticized as ■unduly complex in narrative method. Frequent objections were made to his non-sequential use of time or his habit of using one or more j I narrators to heighten the subjective quality of his narration. Even i ! those critics who approved of these practices complained that his j books— however rewarding*-made hard reading, even for his admirers. 1 I The objection that he did not keep a clear focus on a central hero I (such a hero as Lord Jim, for example) was a common criticism made J Nostromo and, to a lesser degree, The Secret Agent. i Closely allied to the objections to the increasing complexity J of Conrad's work from 190^ until mid-1912 was the practice of I [unfavorably comparing his land fiction of this period with the sea . i j i .fiction he had written before 190k. This practice, though fairly I jcommon in reviews of the time, is most impressive in statements made ■by men like Garnett, Galsworthy, Lucas, Wells, and James— major ! I 1 literary figures of these years who had followed Conrad *s career 'from its beginnings. Their enthusiastic reception of The Mirror of the Sea. Conrad’s chief book about the sea during these years— not a | fictional work but one inspired almost entirely by memory— stood in [eloquent contrast to their virtual silence about Conrad’s fiction of these years, which dealt chiefly with the land, and was inspired almost entirely by imagination. I CHAPTER VI THE POPULAR RECEPTION OF CONRAD’S BOOKS FROM 1895 UNTIL MID-1912 Students of Conrad have long believed that his writings were not widely read until the publication of ’Twixt Land and Sea in 1912. In order to determine just how large and how frequent the printings of his early books were, I have written to his publishers to obtain the best possible information to support or disprove this belief. Since all the records of printings of Conrad’s books published before 1915 have not been kept by his publishers I have had to make use at jtimes of less reliable sources of information. I present whatever figures were available from any source. i j The first printing of Almayer’s Folly was made by the English < publisher T. Fisher Unwin and probably did not include more than 1 2,000 copies. Conrad wrote to Mme. Poradowska on May 2, 1895* "The I first edition of 1,100 copies has been sold."^ Thomas J. Wise, in l his descriptive bibliography of Conrad’s writings published before 2 :1920, gave the size of the first printing as 2,000. Mr. A. D. Marks, 'sales manager of Ernest Benn,Limited, who was associated with the firm of T. Fisher Unwin and Co. at the time Almayer’s Folly was published in 1895* wrote me that "only 1,500 copies were printed." - ' -Letters of Joseph Conrad to Marguerite Poradowska. 1890-1920, trans. and ed. John A. Gee and Paul J. Sturm (New Haven: Yale University Press, 19^0), p. 95. Hereafter this is referred to as Letters to Mme. Poradowska. p Thomas J. Wise, A Bibliography of the Writings of Joseph Conrad ;(1895-1920) (London: printed for private circulation only by R. Clay and Sons, 1920), p. 5* 169 1 Probably more significant than the small size of the first printing of Almayer * s Folly was the fact that even that small printing was sold with some difficulty. Edward Garnett stated: J I The fact that the critics* handsome praise of Almayer*s Folly j failed to sell the novel is attested by my old friend, Mr. David Bice, then Mr. Fisher Unwin’s town traveller, who at my instiga tion had prevailed on the booksellers to subscribe practically the whole edition. Mr. Rice tells me that the majority of the copies rested for years on the booksellers* shelves, and that the title Almayer * s Folly long remained a jest in ’the trade’ at his own expense.3 Garnett’s account was corroborated by Mr. Marks. "The book was not a ! j success," he said, "and it was not until 1907, twelve years later, i that a reprint was called for." 190? was also given by Stephen Gwynn as the year of the second impression of Almayer’s Folly in j l i n 1 England, although Garnett stated that it took only seven years to get to a third impression." The popularity of Almayer’s Folly in the United States as ] i ! jreflected by the size of its first printing here is difficult to i judge because of the dearth of information available. Miss June Meyer, of the college department of The Macmillan Company, publishers of the book in this country in 1895, stated that the files of her :firm contain no reference to any publications by Joseph Conrad. iGeorge T. Keating, in his note on the first American edition, stated, I "Only 650 copies of this edition were printed, and it is a rare , I I I * 3 Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xx. I ^"The Novels of Joseph Conrad,” Edinburgh Review, CCXXXI (April, 1920), 318. * 5 l Introduction to Letters to Conrad, p. xx. j 170 book." Little seems to be known about later printings of this work in the United States. Like Almayer*s Folly. An Outcast of the Islands was first printed in England. Thomas J. Wise said that only 3,000 copies were printed, and Garnett declared that it was eleven years (that is, not 8 until 1907) before a second printing was made in England. Little information is available about the first edition of the novel in the United States. Miss Helen Cohan, representing Appleton-Century Crofts, Inc., was able to say only that Appleton published a cloth edition priced at $1.00 and a paper edition priced at $.50. She was unable to give any information about the number of books printed in i I : jthe first American edition and knew nothing about subsequent printings ‘ 1 : |of the novel. Conrad's next book was first printed by Dodd, Mead, and Co. in j the United States in 1897 under the title The Children of the Sea: 1 I ! A Tale of the Eorecastle. The publisher of this did not reply to my j .query about the size and frequency of printings of the book. Mr.. M. ! iMacphail, Assistant Sales Manager for William Heinemann, Ltd., which j ’ firm published the novel in 1898 under the title The Nigger of the l'*Narcissus": A Tale of the Sea, said that 3*000 copies of the book , ! I were printed in December, 1897* and another 1,500 copies during the 1 ! j 1 Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating (New York: j Doubleday, Doran, and Company, 1929)* p. 13• ^Wise, p. 9* ^Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xx. _ ^ r next year. Mr. Maephail ’ s figures do not agree with the figure of 1,500 copies which Wise gave for a single printing of the work in 9 England in December 1897, "but are probably more accurate. The correctness of Garnett’s statement that The Nigger of the "Narcissus" "took sixteen years to reach its third impression"^9 is attested by j Mr. Macphail's mention of a third impression of 250 copies made in j 191k. As with An Outcast of the Islands. Mr. A. D. Marks, Sales Manager i for Ernest Benn, Ltd., was unable to give any information on printings 1 * ! of Tales of Unrest made by T. Fisher Unwin, first publisher of the two books. Wise stated that 3,000 copies of the first impression ! 11 - i jwere made, and both Garnett and Keating stated that it was eleven j 12 I years before the book was reprinted in England. Miss Peggy Tower, 1 1 of the Publicity Department of Charles Scribner’s Sons, because of the incompleteness of her firm’s records, could state only that in I j 1898 the book had been published in the United States by Scribnerb |at a price of $1.25 per copy. John D. Gordan, however, stated that 13 1,250 copies of the American edition were printed. Although Wise gave a printing of 2,893 for the first edition of 1 1 j 1 i 1 9Wise, p. Ik. ; 10Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xx. ^Wise, p. 15. ■^Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xx and A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 60. Joseph Conrad: The Making of a . Novelist (Cambridge: Harvard j University Press, 19^0), p. 225. 172 ! ik Lord Jim, upon its appearance in England in October, 1900, I was told in a letter, signed simply "D. Blackwood and Sons," that 2,105 copies were printed by that firm in October, 1900, and 1,050 in December of the same year. The writer of the letter further mentioned a third printing of 525 copies in November, 190k, and a fourth of 528 copies in December, 1905* It was not until 191*+> said the writer of the letter, that a fifth printing was made— a sizable one, however, of 15,000 copies. No figures seem to be available on the number of j copies printed in this country by Doubleday, McClure and Company. At | any rate, Miss Helen Crosby of the Publicity Department of the firm i of Doubleday and Company stated that no information on any of Conrad’s . books is now in the files of that firm. I In the letter in which he gave figures on the size of printings ! of The Nigger of the Narcissus, Mr. M. Macphail also listed the first and only printing of The Inheritors: an Extravagant Story, ! which was also published by William Heinemann, Ltd., as amounting to 15 only 1,500 copies, the figure which is also given by Wise. Even I before the printing in England had been made, as Mr. Macphail said, 1"from Electros supplied by McClure, Phillips & Co. in New York," a 1 printing had been made in the United States by the latter firm. As ! with the American printing of Lord Jim, however, no information is ! I now available in the files of Doubleday and Company on just how many ! / copies were printed or how soon a second printing was made. In his I i k x Wise, p. 19. ■ ^ W i s e , p. 21. j 173 essay on The Inheritors which is included in A Conrad Memorial Library, Ford Madox Hueffer said, "The poor Inheritors never had more than one edition and did not so much as sell out its first." Youth, according to the letter from Blackwoods, had a larger initial printing than Lord Jim when first published. In October, 1902, one of 3,150 copies of the book, which appeared as Youth: a Narrative, was made. The writer of the letter also stated that later ones of 1,050 and 525 copies were made in February, 1903, and in November, 1909. The first printing of 3,150 agrees with figures given by 17 Wise, and the interval of six years between the second and third lg printings of the book is also given by Garnett. The informant for Blackwoods stated that Youth did not have a fourth printing until 1919, an impression of 15,750 copies. Miss Crosby, of Doubleday and Company, was -unable to find any information on printings of the book published In the United States iri 1903 under the title Youth, and Two j Other Stories by McClure, Phillips and Company. i Typhoon appeared in the United States as a separately bound book i in 1902, before it was published in England. Since G. P. Putnam's I 1 Sons did not reply to my inquiry about early printings of the book, it seems likely that the original publisher now has no knowledge of jthe number of copies printed. More is known about the first jpublication of the story in England. With "Amy Foster," "Falk," and •j /T P. 79. ■^Wise, p. 2if, - 1 Q Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xx. 17^ ’ ‘ To-morrow," it was published there under the title Typhoon and Other Stories by William Heinemann, Ltd. Mr. Macphail, of that firm, has written that a first printing of 3,000 copies was made in April, 1903, a second of 1,500 copies in June, 1903, and a third of 500 copies in October, 1907. Further printings, of 20,000 copies in 1912 and 5,000 copies each in the years 191^ and 1915* he said, were made later in the "Heinemann Popular Novel Series" which sold at 7d per copy. Wise and Keating also listed the first printing of April, 1903* as one 19 1 of 3*000 copies. Romance, Conrad's second collaboration with Hueffer, was one of J j f 'the most widely sold of his early books. Miss Hilde Radford, of 1 I (John Murray (Publishers^ Limited, wrote me that two impressions of I i ! I the book were made by the original publishers, Smith, Elder & Company, ! i I in 1903 of 3*000 and 1,000 copies. She added: I j i Most of these copies were sold during the first eight months 1 | after publication, and then a few a year until 1916, when the ! work went out of print. A cheap edition at 7d was published i by Thomas Nelson & Son in 1910, and 33*000 copies were sold. This edition also went out of print in 1916. 20 Wise gave the first printing of Romance as one of only 2,000 copies. Mr. James Hartley, of Thomas Nelson & Sons, Limited, wrote that an ledition of 2,000 copies of "Nelson Classics," which sold at Is 6d per copy, was printed in 1916, and listed several printings since that ! 1 | time. Conrad's feeling about the comparative success of the novel was revealed in his letter to Galsworthy on November 30, 1903, in 1 19 Wise, p. 28; A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 112. 20Wise, p. 30. | •which he said that Romance had "gone into a second edition Just one month after publication." "That is better than anything of mine has ever done," he said. In another letter, written on the same day, he told H. G. Wells that Romance had been reprinted and said, "That no i doubt does not mean much, but still it is better than any of my other j 21 ' I books did do." Miss Crosby was unable to find information on the j first American edition of the work published by McClure, Phillips & Company in March, 190^, or on any subsequent printings. i The only figures I have been able to find for the first printings of Nostromo in I . 90K are those given by Wise: 2,000 copies for home i sale and 1,000 copies of the Colonial Edition (for sale to the j 22 Colonies only). In attempting to obtain information on the first ; printing of Nostromo by Harper & Brothers I wrote to Miss Emily ! Dugdale of the Copyright Department of Harper & Brothers. She was j able to inform me that 6,h50 copies of the work were printed in the ! 'united States on September 16, 190^, under the title Nostromo: A Tale I of the Seaboard, but referred me for further information to Hamish Hamilton, Ltd., to which firm Harpers had earlier sold their London I 'office. Mr. James Kind, of the Sales Department of Hamish Hamilton, jLtd., was able only to confirm the fact that the novel had been !published by Harper & Brothers in London in October, 190^. A second printing of the novel was made in England in 1905* according to j 23 1 ■ Stephen Gwynn and Keating. 1 21Life and Letters. I, 322-23. 22Wise, p. 32. ] 23"The Novels of Joseph Conrad," Edinburgh Review. CCXXXI (April, j 1920), 31oj A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 144. | Wise's figure of 1,500 copies for the hook published by Methuen and Company as The Mirror of the Sea: Memories and Impressions is the 2k only one I could obtain for the first British edition of that work. Mr. J. W. Roberts, who replied to my request to Methuen and Company for information, stated that his firm had a policy of not divulging the number of copies of any work printed by them, but he gave the time of the first printing as 1906 and said that second and third ones were made on April 24, 1913, and on November 18, 1915. I then wrote to George G. Harrap & Company, Limited, which firm was also reported I to have published The Mirror of the Sea. Mr. John F. Oliver, Educational Overseas Manager of that firm, was unable to give me i information about any printings of the book prior to 1916 because I many of his firm's records had been destroyed "during the blitz in the recent war." Miss Dugdale, of Harper & Brothers, said that her firm had printed 4,050 copies of the book in the United States on August 1, ; 1 1906, but she made no reference in her letter to later printings. Mr. Roberts, of Methuen and Company, stated that his firm made printings of The Secret Agent in September, 190?, on February 10, 1914, and February 17, 1916. Since he was not able to divulge the size of [the printings, it is necessary to rely on Wise's figure of 2,500 25 jcopies for the first printing of that book in England. Miss Dugdale said that Harpers made a first printing of 4,500 copies of the book ; in this country on August 15, 1907, & date that places the American 2\?ise, p. 36. 2^Wise, p. 38. 177 printing ahead of the first printing in England. Wise stated that only 1,500 copies of A Set of Six were made when 26 that book was first printed by Methuen and Company. Mr. Eoberts gave the date of the printing as August 6, 1908, and said that his firm did not make a second printing of the book -until May 11, 1920. Keating stated that 1,500 copies of the book were printed in August, 1908, and that a "second issue was not printed until September." He gave no 27 indication of the number of copies in the second printing. In 1908 "The Duel]' which had already appeared as the final story of the English volume, was published separately in the United States, under the title The Point of Honor, by the McClure Company. Miss Crosby, 1 'whose firm (Doubleday and Company) has in the past been associated i . . . - with the McClure Company, was unable to find any information on the number of copies in the first printing or the dates of subsequent re-printings. Under Western Eyes was first printed in the United States on August 9, 1911, by Harper & Brothers. Miss Dugdale of that firm stated in her letter that 5*000 copies were printed on that date. Mr. Eoberts, of Methuen and Company, stated that his firm printed ;its first edition of the book in England on October 5* 1911 (which I *28 edition Wise said consisted of 3,000 copies)? and that a second printing was made in 1915* Concerning the sale of the first printing, of. Wise, p. b2. 27 A Conrad Memorial Library, pp. 182-83• 28 Wise, p. kj. 178 Mrs. Conrad said that "after it had been out a month, it had had 29 practically no sale whatsoever in England," but Conrad stated proudly in his preface to the volume in which the book was to appear with others of his collected works: "Under Western Eyes" on its first appearance in England was a failure with the public.... I obtained my reward some six years later when I first heard that the book had found universal recognition in B.ussia and had been re-published there in many ! editions.30 The first printing of Some Reminiscences was one of only 1,000 31 copies, according to Wise. The management of the original publish- j ing firm, Eveleigh Nash, has changed hands several times since the j |book was published in 1912, and Mr. John Porter White, of Grayson and j Grayson, Ltd., the firm that now has the only records of Nash * publications kept during 1908, has written me that all he knew was that Some Reminiscences was "contracted in 1911. No further informa- J » tion available." Keating listed a copy of the book once owned by | J. B. Pinker, Conrad*s literary agent, bearing the Nash imprint and j the imprint date of 1912 as a second e d i t i o n . It is possible that j the first American edition of the book preceded the one in England. Miss Dugdale says that 3,200 copies of the book with the American title were printed by Harper & Brothers as early as January 3, 1912, 2^Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him (New York: Doubleday, Page and ‘Company, 1926), p. 56. | 3°Preface to Under Western Eyes, in Complete Works (New York: Doubleday, Page & Company, 192k), p. viii. ^^Wise, p. k-Q. 32A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 205. 1 179 a. date that could have been earlier than that on which the book was first printed in England. Miss Dugdale gave no information on later printings of the book. Because of the small printings of his books from 1895 to mid- j 1912, Conrad received very little money from the sale of his writings. | I I For his first book, Almayer*s Folly, he was willing to accept only twenty pounds for the copyright, with retention of only the French rights to the book himself. On October 10, 189k, he wrote Mme. Poradowska that Unwin had offered him the opportunity to assume part ! of the risk of publication with a chance to share in the profits 1 from the sale of the book, but he said that he had decided in favor : jof the safer alternative of outright sale of all but the French j jrights to Unwin. He said Unwin had told him also, "Write something j :shorter, of the same kind, for our ’Pseudonym Library,1 and if it j 1 33 suits us we shall be happy to give you a much better cheque.’ ’ As ! Unwin had promised, the cheque for the second novel, An Outcast of the Islands, was much better than the first. Conrad wrote to his friend Ted Sanderson, August 2k, 1895# that he had sold the book the day before "for about 12- g - per cent royalty, and fifty pounds cash payable ■on the 1st of December." He added, "I have half serial and American 'rights, F/iaherj u/nwin/ wants to get the book accepted for a serial „3k 1 by some magazine or newspaper. Conrad received more money for the stories that appeared in The i \ OO Letters to Mme. Poradowska, p. 81. i t h . I life and Letters, I, 177- j 180 1 I Tales of* Unrest than he had received for either of his first novels. Each story in that volume was separately published in magazine form, except "The Return," which Conrad told Garnett he had tried unsuccess- fully to sell to the publishing firm of Chapman and Hall. The other stories were sold separately, not always without difficulty though. The Cornhill, largely because of the assistance of E. V. Lucas to Conrad, paid twelve and a half guineas for "The Lagoon." The Savoy, because of the Symons' work in behalf of Conrad, paid forty guineas for, 37 ' serial rights to "The Idiots," a story that had been twice refused t 38 39 by Cosmopolis. Blackwood's Magazine paid forty pounds for "Karain," j but only after Conrad had tried to get more for it, through the 40 assistance of Fisher Unwin. The Cosmopolis paid fifty pounds for "An Outpost of Progress," but not until Unwin had "bombarded" that ifl magazine with the story, or so Conrad wrote Garnett. In addition to the sums Conrad received for the serial rights to | 1 the individual stories, Garnett said that he received fifty pounds {with ten per cent royalty for the first 2,000 copies) for the k2 published book. Conrad accepted this, however, only after Garnett ^Letters from Conradt pp. 99 and 102. •^Gordan, p. 2^6. ! •^Gordan, p. 222. 3Pi "I have just learned that the Cosmopolis refuses my short story (twice) (twice refuses)," Conrad wrote Garnett, in reference to "The Idiots" on July 10, 1896, Letters from Conrad, p. 39» 1 39 J Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xxix. 4-0 * Letters from Conrad, p. 85. ! ^Life and Letters , I, 19^. | ^Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xxvi. j 181 had -tried to help him place the volume with Smith, Elder and Company, and Regina,Id Smith, one of the partners of that firm had told him, "We are prepared to give you at once 50 pounds for the right to put them /the stories in Tales of Unrest~7 away for a time. ... When we publish we will give you 20$— and all the American rights— whatever they will fetch.Even before Conrad had approached Smith, Elder and Company, however, he had tried unsuccessfully, as he wrote Garnett, to get Unwin to pay him 100 pounds for the novel and guaranteej iik him more favorable royalties. ; During the time that Unwin was preparing to print Tales of Unrest j i in book form, Conrad made arrangements to have the firm of William ■ I I Heinemann, Ltd., publish his third novel with a Malayan setting, (ultimately to be published as The Rescue); and when Tales of Unrest appeared in 1898, Conrad had already promised the novel to that firm, I i upon its completion, and had asked Pawling, Heinemann1s partner, to 1 grant him a pension so that he could complete the work without worry I k5 jabout financial difficulties. Years later, Grant Overton, an I American magazine writer, said that William Heinemann and the American I publisher McClure arranged at about this time to give Conrad an ' allowance of fifty dollars a month, with the assurance that the total k6 | sum advanced would be repaid when the novel was published. On Letters from Conrad, p. 57* ^Letters from Conrad, pp. ^9-50. j ^see letter to Garnett of February 2, 1898. Letters from Conrad, pp. 121-23* "In the Kingdom of Conrad," Bookman. LVIII (May, 1923), 280. March 5, 1898, Conrad wrote Graham that he had made a definite agreement to let McClure have the serial rights to the novel for 250 pounds. "I’ll get another 50 pounds on accept, of book rights in the States (15% royalty). . . . Pawling arranged it all for me,— free j < of charge," he told Graham further. Meanwhile, Conrad had written Garnett that the American publishing firm Charles Scribner*s Sons 48 would have been willing to publish the book if "It had been finished J ' Conrad’s acceptance of the pension from Heinemann and McClure put him, early in 1898, in the difficult position of having to 1 complete a novel that was already sold and partially paid for. In | June he wrote Garnett: j I am awfully behind and though I can work my regular ! ^Garnett’s text may have an omission here that he does not no te7 I cannot make up for the lost three months. I am full of anxiety. Here, I have already had a 100 pounds on acct.l j And the end is not in sight.^9 | During the months that followed, Conrad undoubtedly had further ! advances on the novel, which he did not complete until 1920. As late as August 27, 1910, he wrote to Galsworthy: The book /The Rescue/ is H/einemann/'s absolutely,— and if I never finished it, the fragment, as it stands, were I to die to-morrow, would be worth 500 pounds to him,--unless it is an illusion of my overweening vanity. In the meantime the serial rights to The Nigger of the Narcissus had been sold to William Ernest Henley for publication in the ! ^Life and Letters, I, 231. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 118. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 132. ^Life and Letters, II, 114. Hew Be view during August through December, 1897, on terms that published in book form early in 1898 by Heinemann, on terms that I have not been able to ascertain* But Conrad had again borrowed on his book before it was published. As early as February 28, 1897, he wrote Garnett that he was going to ask Pawling for a cash advance of 25 pounds. Almost a month later he told Garnett that Pawling had 52 sent him a cheque for 30 pounds. In June he -wrote Garnett, MThe Nigger is bought in the States by the Batchelor Syndicate for serial 53 and by Appleton for book." Financial arrangements with the American publishers were undisclosed, but did not seem to relieve the pressure on Conrad, for on January 10, 1898, as he wrote the last pages of the book for Heinemann, Conrad wrote Garnett, And the end I I can’t eat. I dream nightmares and scare my wife. I wish it was over. But I think it will do. It will - ■* • - 0- f c sure. But if I didn’t think so, We can not be sure whether or not the ^,500 copies of The Nigger of the Narcissus were sold as readily as Conrad and Pawling hoped they would be. Pawling showed the confidence the new publisher had in Conrad by telling him just before Tales of Unrest appeared in England that Heinemann’s, Ltd., would pay him 100 pounds" for the next book" ' • ’ ^Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xxvi. ■ ^Letters from Conrad, pp. 77 ^0. ^Letters from Conrad, p. 8^. 51 Garnett described as "satisfactory to Conrad," and it had been I would jump overboard 5^ Introduction to Letters from Conrad, p. xxvii 181+ EC and would try to obtain 2+00 pounds for the serial rights to it. Although Pawling*s promise was made before The Nigger of the Narcissus appeared, it was not clear whether, in making it, Pawling referred to i that book, The Rescuer, or some other book not then in progress. If j Pawling and Heinemann paid such a price for one of Conrad*s later books, it seems unlikely that they made a good bargain, because only two of Conrad*s later books (both financial failures) bear the Heinemann imprint: The Inheritors (written in collaboration with Hueffer), which was published in 1901, and Typhoon and Other Stories, iwhich was published in 1903. As already shown (see p. 172), The 1 Inheritors had an initial printing of only 1,500 copies, was never j printed again in England. Typhoon and Other Stories was probably . not much more popular than The Inheritors. At any rate, Conrad wrote his friend William Rothenstein, ten years after the book had been j ' published, that the title story of the volume had been placed by | I Conrad's agent, J. B. Pinker, only with "the greatest difficulty" for j 56 "a few pence, so to speak." Whether or not Conrad was able to obtain more money for the two 1 books published by William Blackwood and Sons (Lord Jim in 1900 and 1 Youth in 1902) I have not been able to determine. Publishers are ; 1 usually reluctant to divulge information of this type, even though it 1 'may be known to them, and although my request to Blackwoods included ; . 1 a query about the financial aspects of Conrad's relation with their ! • ^Letters from Conrad, p. 104. 5^Life and Letters, II, 31. j 185 firm, their reply contained no information on such matters. Conrad's statement to Garnett on May, l898--"l have sold (I think) the sea things to B. /probably Blackwoods7 for 35 pounds (13,000 words)— is the only reference he seems to have made in his letters about financial arrangements with that firm. The amount is so low that it must have been his price for "Youth" alone, which he describes in the same letter as a story of 13,000 words. It is clearj however, that by 1903 Conrad had to borrow constantly. The advances from Heinemann and McClure during 1897 and 1898 must have been acutely embarassing to him, particularly since he had been unable to complete The Rescue, the novel on which the pension system of advances was based. ("Time passes— and McClure waits--not to speak of Eternity for which I don't care a damn. Of 58 MeCliare however I am afraid," Conrad wrote Garnett March 29, 1898. ) ( f During 1899 J* B. Pinker became Conrad's literary agent and, I jduring the years that followed, lent him substantial sums of money. By ! the time he was writing Nostromo in 1903, Pinker was lending Conrad i . sums of money which he hoped to repay when the novel was published. On August 22, 1903, he wrote Pinker: j Have you sent anything to Watson /his banker/ this month? I daren't draw a check. But I felt too sick of everything to write you before. Moreover, ray salvation is to shut eyes and 1 ears to everything--or else I couldn't write a line. And yet sometimes I can't forget— I remember the tradesmen, and all the horrors descend upon me. DamnI Try to help me out to the end of this and then we shall see how we stand. And then there 57 Letters from Conrad, p. 131* 58 Letters from Conrad, p. 126. 186 will be nothing for it but to start on the Mediterranean story which is contracted for.59 The urgency of Conrad's financial situation even became knownto his friends, and just a year later Conrad wrote Gosse a letter in which he defended Pinker against Gosse's charge, which had come to Conrad as gossip, that "Pinker dealt harshly with Conrad." Part of the letter follows: He /Pinker*7 has known me for six years. He has stepped gallantly into the breach left open by the collapse of my bank: and not only gallantly, but successfully as well. He has treated not only my moods but even my fancies with the greatest consideration. I would not dream of wearying you with details and figures: but his action, distinctly, has not been of a mercenary character. . . . But I fear I am not a "profitable" man for anybody's speculation. ® During the years that followed, as his books sold slowly, Conrad ! had frequent "recourse to Pinker," as he came to call it.^’ On ' February 23, 1905, he asked Pinker for twenty-five pounds because j ,62 . i he was "utterly without cash. ’ On March 5, 1906, he asked Pinker i for an advance of fifty pounds against The Mirror of the Sea as a means of "working toward a happy release from worries." On January 25 and on February 26, 1907, he wrote Pinker for ten pounds and fifteen pounds respectively, and on the latter date he told Pinker that he would have to secure from Harpers an advance of cash on a 1 59 Life and Letters. I, 316. 60 Life and Letters. I, 332. ^Life and Letters, II, 18. Life and Letters, II, 13- ^Life and Letters. II, 30. 187 6k story he was writing for them. On May 18, 1907, Conrad wrote Pinker from Geneva that he had underestimated his traveling expenses and would have to borrow 1100 francs to pay his debt to his hotel manager. "And please don’t scold me," he said, "because I have Just now as 65 much as I can bear. Poignant though these requests for relatively small sums seem to the student of Conrad today, they indicate only imperfectly the debt to Pinker that Conrad contracted over the years, for on January 6, 1908, he admitted to Galsworthy that by then Pinker had lent him a < 66 ! total of 1,572 pounds. And still he bad to go on borrowingI By the ' fall of 1909 he had hopes of assistance from a Civil List pension jGosse and other friends were trying to secure for him, but in October 1 of that year he wrote Pinker that he needed " 5* 12/8d more" because the "pension business" seemed to have "fallen through" for that 3 68 / T r y year. Even as late as April 6, 1913, he was still thanking Pinker (for placing money to his credit with his bank. ; Conrad complained to Galsworthy on January 6,1908, that for his "'eleven novels" up to that date he had earned only 650 pounds per i 69 ! year. Most of the total amount must have been from the original Life and Letters, II. in, 65Life and Letters, II, ^8. 66Life and Letters, II, 66. 67Life and Letters, II, 103. 68Life and Letters, II, Ikk. 69Life and Letters, II, 66. book sales or from the sale of serial rights, rather than from royalties received from reprintings, for he wrote Galsworthy a year later: Excuse this discordant strain; but the fact is tha,t I have Just received the accounts of all my publishers, from which I perceive that all my immortal works (13 in all) have brought me last year something tinder five pounds in royalties. That sort of thing quenches that Joie de vivre which should burn like a flame in an author's breast and in the manner of an^Q explosive engine drive his pen onward at 30 pages an hour. What made Conrad's case especially critical was the fact that during his years as a writer of fiction he had only a few other sources of income open to him. As early as 1898 he began to write for the press. On February 3, 1898, he wrote to Ted Sanderson, a mutual friend of his and Galsworthy's: 1 J And so I've taken to writing for the press. Mere words,— 1 another hole. Still the degradation of daily Journalism has been spared to me so far. There is a new weekly coming. Its name: The Outlook: its price: threepence sterling: its attitude: literary: its policy,--Imperialism, tempered by expediency: its mission,--to make money for a Jew: its editor Percy Hurd (never * heard of him): one of its contributors, Joseph Conrad,--under the heading of "Views and Reviews."^1 1 I jIn 1905, by then in even worse financial straits, he wrote articles I I for the Speaker. Upon sending the first one, "Anatole France," to Garnett for criticism he wrote: Ecco-ia. Here's your A^iatol§7F^ra.nce7 in proof of my affection. . . . Isn't it miserablei Isn't it miserable to have to work in fetters bound and gagged as it were by the irresolution and sluggishness of one's intellect, by a . difficulty of saying the simplest thing. ^°Life and Letters, II, 9^* 71Life and Letters. I, 227. 72 betters from Conrad, p. 192. 189 Still later, always in need of additional income, he wrote for the Daily Mall. In October, 1909, he wrote Pinker that he had accepted twelve guineas from that newspaper as his price for writing 1,200 words on "the Waratah case," and on June 26, 1910, he again wrote Pinker that he had agreed to contribute his writings to the Daily 73 Mail at a price of five guineas per column. Although Conrad hoped for years for a regular income in the form of a Civil List pension, it was not until 1911 that such help was granted. Just before his death in 1900 Stephen Crane had urged one of his influential British friends to help obtain such a pension for Conrad, (see above, p. 59) but Crane's idea seems to have caught on slowly. On March 23, 1905, Conrad thanked Edmund Gosse for his help in convincing the Prime Minister, Mr. Arthur Balfour, that he deserved 7k help from the British government. As a . result of Gosse's efforts Conrad was given a cash grant, which he told Galsworthy amounted to 75 "something like 300." The nature of Gosse*s conversation with the Prime Minister was kept so confidential that it is not now possible 76 to tell if Gosse mentioned the idea of the pension at all in 1905, and it was not until June 7, 1911, that Conrad was able to write 73 ' Life and Letters. II, 102-103, 112. y l j . Life and Letters, II, 14. ^Life and Letters. II, 18. ^0n April 11, 1905 Conrad wrote Gosse: "In the matter of the j confidential treating of the transaction, I conceive that there’s no ■ option for me but to extend the rule of absolute discretion even to ; such friends as H. G. Wells and Hugh Clifford— since the most innocent , confidence could be, by some accident, made to look like a wilful dis- ) regard, on my part, of the King’s distinct wish." life and Letters,11,15. ‘ 190 Ted Sanderson, "I must tell you that before long you shall see it gazetted that Joseph Conrad has been granted a pension of 100 pounds on the Civil List for his services to Literature. "77 i During the years from 1895 until mid-1912 Conrad had one further j source of supplementary income. Like the other two, it was also a by- j i product of his writing. In 1911 he sold the first of his manuscripts 1 78 to an American book-collector for 30 pounds. However, this was probably the only sum Conrad was able to obtain by this means during these years. The really profitable- sale of most of his manuscripts to ! John Quinn occurred after mid-1912. At any rate, as late as April 12, . j1913, Conrad wrote Galsworthy that he had not yet met Quinn,-the 1 ; j American lawyer who a . year or two later paid 2,000 pounds for j ! manuscripts of Conrad*s writings which he was able to sell in 1923 79 for 2h,000 pounds. In addition to Conrad’s financial troubles, he usually had the further trouble of being unable to meet the deadlines set by himself 1 or his publishers for completion of his books. No sooner had he received the first advances on The Rescue from Heinemann and McClure, | ^Life and Letters. II, 130. , 1 ^®See Conrad 's letter of "Aug., 1911/' '?to Galsworthy. Life and j . Letters, II, 133-13^. I 79Th. difficulty of Conrad's financial position in 1913 or 1914, when the manuscripts were sold to Quinn, is clearly shown by Mrs. Conrad’s description of the situation in her home at the time of the sale. "The items were hard at the moment, and in addition | ' to our Bank breaking and dissolving--there is no other word— our , small hard-earned capital, the work dragged and the great author ; was depressed and ill." Joseph Conrad and his Circle (New York: , E. P. Dutton 8s Co., 1935), p. 165. 191 o ' for instance, than he began to worry about when he would be able to complete that book. On June 15, 1898, he wrote Ted Sanderson that he dreaded an interview he was to have with McClure the next day for the 80 purpose of discussing his "previously ill-gotten gains." On August 26, 1898, he wrote R. B. Cunninghame Graham that Clement Shorter of the Illustrated London Mews had bought the novel from McClure and had "suddenly decided to put it into the last quarter of News." "I thought I had months before me and am caught," he told Graham. "The worst is I had advances from McClure. So I must write 8l 0 or burst." The increased gravity of the situation five days later is revealed in these lines Conrad wrote to Mrs. Sanderson: The Rescue is to appear as a serial in the Illustrated London News, to begin on October the first and end with the year. This is sprung on me suddenly: I am not ready: the "artist" is in despair: various Jews are in a rage: McClure weeps: threats of cancelling contracts are in the air,--it is an inextricable mess. Dates are knocked over like ninepins: proofs torn to rags: copyrights trampled under foot. The last shred of honour is gone,— also the last penny. I Six weeks later he wrote Graham’s mother that he was unable to visit 1 |her and her son until he had liberated himself "from the incubus of 1 Qo ;that horrid novel." Apparently a new deadline had then been set, for he later wrote Graham*s mother that his "wretched novel" was to 8°Life and Letters. I, 2*1-1. 8^Life and Letters, I, 2*<-5. 82Life and Letters, I, . ^Life and Letters f I, 251. 192 84 appear in the Illustrated London News in April of the next year. Finally, at the end of the year, he wrote Mme. Angele Zagorska, one of his Polish relatives, "Since the month of January, I have been in such a state that I have been unable to write anything. . . . The novel is 6 months behind. This is ruin! and even now I am not at all well."85 His difficulty in completing the novel carried on into the next year. The April deadline was not met, and on May 24th he wrote a ! letter to the British publisher, Sir Algernon Methuen, that he could | l not write for him because of his commitment to McClure and Heinemann I 86 1 on The Bescue. On August 23rd Conrad’s despair about his inability ; to meet deadlines was shown in the following reply he made to J. B. 1 Pinker's proposal to become his literary agent: My method of writing is so unbusinesslike that I don’t think ! i you could have any use for such an unsatisfactory person. I j I generally sell a work before it is begun, get paid when it is I 1 half done and don’t do the other half till the spirit moves me. | I must add that I have no control whatever over the spirit-- ! neither has the man who has paid the money. 7 | Letters to Ted Sanderson on October 12th and October 26th further illustrated the difficulty he had in forcing himself to work at the 88 > novel* I His habit of not meeting deadlines may have been an important ^Life and Letters, I, 255. 85bife and Letters, I, 265. 86Life and Letters, I, 277. 8?Life and Letters, I, 278. 88Life and Letters, I, 282 and 287. __________ i 1931 reason for proposing a collaboration to Ford Madox Hueffer. At any rate, Hueffer seems to have recognized the difficulty Conrad had previously had in completing his manuscripts, for the two men wrote on a draft of Bomance which was later owned by Keating, "The story j of which this skeleton and many details are already worked out shall ' < 89 1 be greatly advanced if not absolutely finished in July, 1899*" 1 Through the years that followed, Conrad continued to find it difficult to keep his writing on schedule. While writing Hostromo, he informed Arnold Bennett, October 2, 1903, "I am four months behind , 90 with a wretched novel I am writing for Harpers." During his visit j I 1 to Capri, he wrote Galsworthy in May, 1905, that he had been able to j 1 write only 10,000 words per month during the past few months, an j average which he declared would "have to be caught up" when he 1 91 returned to Pent Farm in Kent. During the month after his return to Pent Farm at the end of May (he later told Galsworthy) he was able 92 i to write only 7,000 words.^ I i As if Conrad did not have enough trouble, illnesses brought still more. While he was at work on The Secret Agent, family illnesses ‘ constantly plagued him. Of the weeks spent at Champel, Switzerland, 1 during which Conrad completed the manuscript for publication, 'Mrs, Conrad wrote: 89 A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 133* ’ Life and Letters, I, 320. 'Life and Letters, II, 18. life and Letters, II, 21. 19k While I wa.s fighting for, the last spark of life in John /the younger son/, Conrad looked after Borys and earned my additional respect "by managing, under those circumstances to rewrite and expand by some 15,000 words the end of "The Secret Agent."93 ( Similar difficulties also beset Conrad as he wrote the stories for A Set of Six during 1907. Mrs. Conrad said that "An Anarchist" and "The Informer" in particular "cost their author great mental Oil , suffering." Conrad's natural difficulty in completing work on schedule was caused at times by other factors also beyond his control. In 1902 i he was compelled to re-write "The End of the Tether," by far the ' i longest of the three stories in Youth, because his first manuscript ' • 95 of that story had been accidentally burned. His own illnesses : I (chiefly his gout) were so distracting that he estimated (in a letter to William Rothenstein) that at the end of 1909 one-third of his 96 time as a writer had been lost to illness. In May, 1911, he wrote Galsworthy that during the previous year he had been granted only j nine and a half months for writing, "the other 2^ months being like 1 the lowest circle of the Inferno and not to be thought of, even, 97 without shudders." At the end of March, 1912, he wrote Galsworthy I that since June of the previous year he had written an average of I i 93joSeph Conrad as I Knew Him (New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 1926), p. 55. t 9^Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him, p. 126. 9^See his letter to Edward Garnett, "August, 1902." Letters from Conrad, p. 185. 96Life and Letters, II, 10k. ! 97Life and Letters, II, 129. ' 1 9 5 1 10,000 words per month, "of which four were lost for various reasons,— mostly health."^ It is small wonder that, in ref erring to Conrad’s health during his years as a writer, Ford Madox Hueffer remembered after his death that "Conrad had a very dreadful, a very agonizing life."99 In spite of the fact that the years from 1895 until mid-1912 did not bring Conrad financial security, there is evidence that he continued to hope, even in despair, for success. In October, 1899* he wrote Ted Sanderson: 1 A book of mine (Joseph Conrad’s last) is to come out in j March. Three stories in one volume• If only five thousand copies could be soldi If onlyI . .. Oh! dear Ted, it is a ; fool’s business to write fiction for a living.100 I In August, 1903* he wrote Pinker about Romance, "The story seems j ' " 1 " ' very promising. It may do the trick.1 '^'^’ In June, 1905* be wrote j Galsworthy, "Today the article ’Autocracy and War’ with the motto Sine ira et studio appeared in the Fortnightly. I hope for a i 1 rvp sensation. I am reduced to that." In May, 1907, he expressed in the following lines to Pinker his hopes for The Secret Agent: The S/ecret] Argent/ approached with a fresh eye does not strike me as bad at all. There is an element of popularity in it. By this I don’t mean to say that the thing is likely t 9®Life and Letters, II, 139* ‘ ^Joseph Conrad: A Personal Remembrance (Boston: Little Brown and j Company, 1925), p. 255 . 10°Life and Letters, I, 283. i ^ bpife and Letters, I, 316. ‘ ~^^Life and Letters, II, 21. j 196 to "be popular. I merely think it shows traces of capacity for that sort of treatment which may make a novel popular. As I've told you my mind runs much on popularity now. I would try to reach it not by sensationalism hut by means of taking a widely discussed subject for the text of my novel. In July of the same year he wrote Pinker again about his hopes for The Secret Agent, as well as Chance, which he had then started to write. ' ’ I think I can say safely that the Secret Agent is not the sort of novel to make what comes after it difficult to place. Neither j will it, I fancy, knock my prices down," he said. "Chance itself will ... be salable I believe. Of course it will not be on popular lines. Nothing of mine ever can be, I fear. But even Meredith ended J 10*4- i by getting his sales." After preparing the stories in A Set of Six j for publication, he wrote his publisher, Sir Algernon Methuen, in j January, 1908, that the stories in the collection were "just stories 105 in which I've tried my best to be simply entertaining." In October of that same year he wrote Pinker at length about his hope that Some Beminiseences would bring him a popular success. "My literary reputation ... has already enough substance to weigh favorably in the scale for the success of a , personal book," he said. "It may be, so to speak, the chance of a life-time--coining neither too soon nor yet too latej for my acceptance as an English writer is _. , _ . „106 an accomplished fact. 103Life and Letters, I, *4-9. 10!*Life and Letters, H H 10W and Letters, II, 66. 106Life and Letters, I, 87-88. 197 Conrad’s hopes for a popular success, however, usually alternated, with his fears that each book would fail to sell widely. Early in 107 1896 he spoke of An Outcast of the Islands, as "the coming failure," and later in the same year he wrote his Polish relatives Charles and Angele Zagorska, "I used to write and to write ceaselessly, but now the sight of an inkpot and a , penholder fill me with rage and disgust— 1 and yet I am still writingIn June, 1902, he wrote to Garnett, "Ify expression has become utterly worthless; it is time for the money 109 ' to come rolling in." A little over a year later he wrote I i Galsworthy j "I fight against demoralization of which I bear the brunt J and my friends bear the cost.""*"^ In 190^, after Nostromo had been | published, he wrote Graham that the public would "turn its back on j 111 i it no doubt." By 1905 he expressed his disappointment, which had become even more keen, in these lines: Of books born from the restlessness, the inspiration, and the vanity of human mind those that the Muses would love best lie more than all others under the menace of an early death. ... But the best of books drawing sustenance from the memory of men have lived on the brink of destruction, for men’s memories are short, and their sympathy is, we must admit, a fluctuating, unprincipled emotion. The good artist should expect no recognition of his genius, 107 110. jug t uci 0 vjuiu au ^Life and Letters, ) V I, 199. Letters from Conrad, p. 183. 1 Life and Letters, I, 317. ’ Life and Letters, I, 337. 198 because his toil can with difficulty be appraised and his genius cannot possibly mean anything to the illiterate who, even from the dreadful wisdom of their own evoked dead have, so far, culled nothing but inanities and platitudes. As he prepared The Secret Agent for publication during 1906, Conrad wrote Galsworthy: I doubt not only my talent (I was never so sure of that) but my character. Is it indolence— which in my case would be nothing short of baseness,— or what? No man has a right to go on as I j am doing without producing manifest masterpieces. It seems I have no excuse under heaven or on earth. Enough.1^ By January, 1908, hopes for The Secret Agent had proved vain, and he ! wrote Galsworthy that the novel could by then be called "an honourable j 1 1 failure." "It brought me neither love nor promise of literary success," he complained. "I own that I am cast down. I suppose I ! i am a fool to have expected anything else." As he had earlier compared , I his plight with Meredith's, he now compared it with Hardy’s. "I suppose there is something in me that is unsympathetic to the general public," he said, "because the novels of Hardy, for instance, are , I generally tragic enough and gloomily written too,--and yet they have sold in their time and are selling to the present day." In the same letter he expressed his concern over how to make his own writings 1 'reach a larger public as follows: j 1 Ahl ray dear, you don't know what an inspiration-killing anxiety | it is to think: "Is it salable?" There's nothing more cruel than to be caught between one's impulse, one’s act, and that < question, which for me is simply a matter of life and death. I There are moments when the mere fear sweeps my head clean of every thought. It is agonizing,--no less. And,--you know,— Joseph Conrad, "Books," Speaker, XXXI (July 22, 1905), ^^Life and Letters. II, 33* 199 114 that pressure grows from day to day instead of getting less. When, in 1908, his next hook, A Set of Six, ,had a sale of only a few thousand copies, dashing the hopes for it he had expressed to Sir Algernon Methuen (see above, p.196), he wrote Mme. Poradowska. that the favorable criticisms of his writings which she had recently told him of reading were of little consolation. "So long as the public will have none of me it makes no difference," he said. "For fifteen years now I have been writing, and at my age I may be allowed 115 to be a little tired of it." During the next year Conrad continued to confide to his friends of his despair over the limited sale of his books. In June, 1909, be wrote Galsworthy as he lay immobilized by his perpetual enemy, the gout: The horrible depression is worst of all. It is rather awful to lie helpless and think of the passing days, of the lost time. But the most cruel time is afterwards, when I crawl out of bed to sit before the table, take up the pen,— and have to fling it away in sheer despair of ever writing a line. And I*ve had thirteen years of it if not more. Anyway, all my writing life. I think that in this light the fourteen vols. (up-to-date) are something of an achievement. But it's a poor consolation. The way was long, the wind was cold, j The minstrel was infernal old: 1 His harp, his sole remaining joy, I Was stolen by an organ boy,— I 116 ! That's the way I feel. ' In December he wrote William Bothenstein that he was then, in his ^^Life and Letters, II, 65. ^ ^Letters to Mme. Poradowska, p. 113* -^^Life and Letters, II, 98. , 200 117 fifty-second year, "a failure from the worldly point of view." During the same month he wrote Galsworthy, "I wish sometimes I had remained at sea, which, had I honestly stuck to it, would no doubt be jLILS rolling now over my head." Almost a year later, in November, 1910, Conrad's despair had reached such a pitch that he was railing bitterly against the public which had been neglecting his books. "A public is not to be found in a class, caste, clique or type. » . . And no artist can give it what it wants because it doesn't know what'it wants," he said. But it will swallow everything. It will swallow Hall Caine and John Galsworthy, Victor Hugo, and Martin Tupper. It is an ostrich, a clown, a giant, a bottomless sack. It is sublime. It has apparently no eyes and no entrails, like a slug, and yet it can weep and suffer. It has swallowed Christianity, Buddhism, Mahomedanism and the Gospel of Mrs. Eddy. And it is perfectly capable, from the height of its secular stability, of looking down upon the artist as a mere windlestrawl11^ Although Conrad said in his "Familiar Preface" to Some Reminiscences, in 1912, that "fifteen years of unbroken silence before praise or blame" was "sufficient testimony" of his "respect for criticism, that fine flower of personal expression in the garden of jletters,"1^0 he made several statements over the years which showed that he was sensitive to criticism of his writings. It seems not i i unlikely that the slow sale of his books increased his sensitivity. I , In October, 1907, as already mentioned (see p. 127), be wrote Garnett: ^^Life and Letters, II, 9&. 1 n Q Life and Letters, II, 106. 119Life and Letters. II, 122. 120 P. xvii. 201 I've been so cried up of late as a sort of freak, an amazing bloody foreigner -writing in English (every blessed review of s/ecret7 A/gent/ had it so) that anything I say will be dis counted on that ground by the public— that is if the public, that mysterious beast, takes any notice whatever--which I doubt.121 122 After reading reviews of "The Duel" in 1908, Conrad wrote Garnett that he had tried to put into the story "as much of Napoleonic feeling as the subject could hold." "This has been missed by all the 1 reviewers, every single one being made blind by the mere tale," he 123 said. And later in the same year he complained to Garnett, after 1 I reading Arthur Symons’s appreciation of his writings, "I read in a 1 1 study (still unpublished) of Conrad, that I gloat over scenes of ! I 12^ j cruelty and am obsessed by visions of spilt blood." | i Conrad's tendency to remember for years criticisms he found objectionable is illustrated by his strong feeling in 1918 about a 1 i comment made twenty years earlier about The Nigger of the Narcissus. j The sailors in that work, Conrad objected, had been characterized "by j a friendly reviewer as a lot of engaging ruffians." "What on earth is an ’engaging ruffian*? He must be a creature of literary imagina- (tion, I thought, for the two words don’t match in my personal opinion," said Conrad. "I consoled myself, however, by the reflec- ( 1 tion that the friendly reviewer must have been talking like a parrot, ( 12lLetters from Conrad, p. 212. j 122This story, one of A Set of Six in the English volume, was separately published in the United States as The Point of Honor. 123 Letters from Conrad, p. 222. 1 ph Letters from Conrad, p. 225. Symons’ appreciation was finally published in 191* + and is treated below, pp. 227-28. 1 202 125 which so often seems to -understand what it says." A second example of this tendency is shown in Conrad’s objections to the comments of an American reader on "Freya of the Seven Isles/' which follow: I was considerably abused for writing that story on the ground of its cruelty, both in public prints and in private letters. I remember one from a man in America who was quite furiously angry. He told me with curses and imprecations that I had no right to write such an abominable thing which, he said, had gratuitously harrowed his feelings. It was a very interesting letter to read. Impressive too. I carried it for some days in my pocket. Had I the right? The sincerity of his anger impressed me. Had I the right? Had I really sinned as he j said or was it only that man's madness? Yet there was method t in his fury. ... I composed in my mind a violent reply, a | reply of lofty detachmentj but they never got on paper in the f end and I have forgotten their p h r a s i n g . ! Such late statements as these seem to oppose and virtually invalidate the following profession of stoical indifference to criticism which I I Conrad made in 1912: j If it be permissible to twist, invert, adapt (and spoil) j M. Anatole France's definition of a good critic, then let us say that the good author is he who contemplates without j marked joy or excessive sorrow the adventure of his soul amongst criticisms.-^7 j i To Conrad’s suspicion, if not distrust, by 1912, of both the : public and the critic might well be added his suspicion of the ; publisher. Although the evidence to support belief in this suspicion | 1 o c litotes on Life and Letters (London and Toronto: J. M. Dent and Sons, 1921), p. 259. The statements above were first made in |1918 in "Well Done," a paper later included in Dotes on Life and Letters. •^^Preface to 'Twixt Land and Sea, in Collected Works (Hew York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 192k), pp. ix-x. 127 Some Reminiscences, pp. 189-190. 203 is slender, it does possibly indicate that toward the end of* his life Conrad was sterner and more realistic in dealing with publishers than he was when he first began to write. In 1896, while he was attempting to place Tales of Unrest with T. Fisher Unwin he showed-his willing ness to accept his publisher’s appraisal of his merits as a writer by writing somewhat deferentially: 1 1 As to my demands, which you might think excessive, it's just this: I can't afford to work for less than ten pence per hour and must work in a way that will give me this magnificent ! income. I intend to stick to scribbling till I am fairly ' convinced of my wisdom or my folly. I will see it out— but I | ! do not wish to see it out at your expense. After all, my work : has some value, but if people won't have any of it, I can do one j or two other things less gentlemanly (save the mark) but not a whit less honourable or useful. But I have not time to lose ; and must look about quickly so as not to be left standing between two stools occupied by better men.^° |His later attitude is reflected in his reply to Hamlin Garland's {statement in 1921, "You have a loyal friend in Doubleday." Garland I quotes Conrad's reply as follows: j I do not believe in mixing sentiment with pleasure. . . . He is a good business man. I do not believe in mixing sentiment with business. Doubleday would not publish my books if he did not expect to make money. Publishers dgQnot permit friendship to come into the making of contracts. y | It would be hard to believe that the difficulties Conrad faced iduring these years were reflected in his attitudes without being also reflected in his writings. Ford Madox Hueffer, who knew well 1 the difficulties Conrad faced during these bitter years, wrote later: By the time he came to see life ... less as a matter of | Conway-trained and steadfast individuals heroically fighting ’ A Conrad Memorial Library, p. 42. Friendly Contemporaries (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1932) , p . i m :— — __________________________________________ _! 204 august northwesters, the unseeing and malignant destiny that waits on us writers set him in such circumstances as robbed him of the leisure in which Youth and Heart of Darkness could be written. . . . With his later work, it was different, since the leisure mood was gone; he thought, as it were, continually under a cloud of panic and finally in moods of despair that broke the backs of his books. . . . "Broke the back" was his own phrase. By it he meant that, after months and months, or even years and years, of desperate and agonized thinking, despairingly at the dictates of Pinker or Pawling or old Mr. Blackwood or some other cheque-withholding minister of destiny, he contrived any old end for his book and let it go at that, such a book remaining forever in his mind as a record of failure and the futility of human effort.1^ The following table, which summarizes the reliable information available on the size and frequency of English printings of Conrad's books, makes clear the limited popular reception of Conrad's books from 1895 until mid-1912. Book Number of copies in first printing Almayer's Folly (l895) • • » ......... 1,500 An Outcast of the Islands (1896) . . . 3,000 The Nigger of the Narcissus (1898) . . 4,500 Tales of Unrest (1898) . I . . . 7 . . 3,000 Lord Jim (l900). . . .............. 3,155 The Inheritors (1901)............. . . 1,500 Youth (1902) ..................... 3,300 Typhoon and Other Stories (1903) ... 4,500 i Romance (19031 ^ I ~. ...... 4,000 ' Nostromo (1904). ............... 3,000 The Mirror of the Sea (1906)... 1,500 j The Secret Agent (190?)..........2,500 A Set of Six (1908T7................. 1,500 Under Western Eyes (1911)....... 3,000 Some Reminiscences (1912)....... 1,000 Years required to reach a reprinting of more than 1.000 copies ... IP ... 11 ... 16 ... 11 . . . 14 ... 24 ... 16 • 9 7 Doubtful information 7 ... 7 ... 12 ... 4 Doubtful information In arriving at these figures I have combined the first two printings of The Nigger of the Narcissus, Lord Jim, Youth, and Bomance because 1^°Mightier than the Sword: Memories and Criticisms (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1938), p. 87. 205 the second printing of each of these books followed the first by a matter of only a few weeks or months, was clearly planned from the beginning by the publisher concerned, and therefore did not reflect the public demand for the book in question- I have also used 1,000 copies as a significant figure for a reprinting because, although small reprintings of Lord Jim (525 in 190^ and 528 in 1905),, Youth (525 in 1909), and Typhoon (500 in 190?) were made during these early years, they do not seem to reflect any real demand for Conrad’s jwritings. Also, because of the doubtful character of the information j !on the second printings of Hbstromo and Some Reminiscences, I have { considered it necessary to leave them out of consideration. : Based upon the tabulated information it is apparent that the average printing, of the first fifteen of Conrad’s books in England was 2,730. Based on the twelve books for which information seems reliable or significant (The Inheritors was not re-published until the Complete Works appeared in 192^ and has been omitted as a j failure) we find that it took each of Conrad’s books in England I somewhat over ten years to reach a sizable printing which reflected ■ the public demand. Furthermore, we see that Conrad’s two books of |sea fiction, The Nigger of the Narcissus and Typhoon and Other Stories, I 'led all other books in the size of their initial printings. This fact 1 ,is probably less significant than it might at first appear, however, because both of these books were published by Heinemann and Company ! i and may simply reflect the confidence of that publisher in Conrad’s j future. More significant is the fact that during the period from ! 190^ until mid-1912 Conrad’s books averaged 2,000 copies for each 206 first printing, a figure well "below the over-all average of 2,730 copies per hook for the period from 1895 until mid-1912 and even more noticeably below the average first printing of 3,l6l copies per book for the period from 1895 through 1903. From a limited point of view, it appears that Conrad might have enjoyed better treatment from his American than from his English publishers. A comparison of the first printings of books in this country by Harper and Brothers, for example, with the first printings 1 I |of the same books in England, which follows, seems to indicate such a jcomclusiop.: ( 1 Copies in Copies in ! Book U. S. England Ffostromo (190* 0 . .............. 6,*1-50 j The Mirror of the Sea (1906) ......... **-,050 iThe Secret Agent (1907). ................ *4-,500 iUnder Western Eyes (19II). ........ 5,000 A Personal Record (1912) ... .............. 3,200 3,000 1,500 2,500 3.000 1.000 Placed alongside the average first printing of 2,200 copies of each of these books by English publishers, the average first printing of k,6h-0 copies of each of these books by Harper and Brothers impresses us as demonstrating the confidence of that American publisher in Conrad’s writings. Unfortunately, however, other American publishers did not share this confidence. The frequent change in the name of the publisher on title-pages of first American printings of Conrad’s books shows this very clearly; the books and the publishers of each of them follow: 207 Book Publisher Almayer1 s Polly (1895) ................The Macmillan Company An Outcast of the Islands (1896) ... D. Appleton and Company *The Children of the Sea (1897) . . . Dodd, Mead and Company Tales of Unrest (1898) T ............Charles Scribner * s Sons Lord Jim (19007. ........... Doubleday and McClure Co. The Inheritors (1901). . ............ McClure, Phillips and Co. Typhoon (1902J . ..................G. P. Putnam's Sons Youth (1903)..........................McClure, Phillips and Co. Falk (1903) McClure, Phillips and Co. Romance (1903) ............ McClure, Phillips and Co. Hostromo (190*4-)......... Harper and Brothers The Mirror of the Sea (1906) ..........Harper and Brothers The Secret Agent (1907)........... Harper and Brothers 1 *~*The Point of Honor (1908).........The McClure Company j Under Western Eyes Tl91l) ...... Harper and Brothers jA Personal Record (1912) ....... Harper and Brothers ♦American title for The Nigger of the Narcissus **Last story of A Set of Six, published in this country as a separate volume. By counting as one the publishing firms in which the name of Robert- McClure appeared, we find that Conrad's fifteen books published in this country between 1895 and mid-1912 bore the names of seven different publishers. From this evidence alone it would seem clear that American publishers found little profit in printing his books. ( Hot until Conrad complained of his treatment by American publishers to Alfred A. Knopf in 1913 were satisfactory arrangements made to have his books published here (see below, p. 2*48). It is not surprising that Conrad was unable to live on the income from the sale of his books alone. His feeling during these years that success was somewhere in the offing but near enough to be used to borrow against made matters worse. Ho sooner had he reached a position of extreme embarrassment because of the cash advances he had taken from McClure and Heinemann on The Rescue than 208 he had begun to borrow from his literary agent, J. B. Pinker. The fact that Pinker had lent Conrad over 1,572 pounds by the beginning of 1908 reminds one of Samuel Johnson's remark after the death of Goldsmith— "Was ever a poet so trusted?" It is to Conrad's credit, of course, that he sought for additional methods of obtaining income, chiefly that of -writing for periodicals. The additional income he received from the sale of the manuscript of An Outcast of the Islands was negligible. Thus the only other source of any considerable supplementary income was that of outright grants | from the British government--the cash grant of 300 pounds in 1905 and the Civil List pension in 19U. He continued to fall further j into debt to Pinker during this period, however, and to his other - problems were added those of illnesses, either of himself or of 1 members of his family, and such a mischance as that of the accidental : burning of the first manuscript of "The End of the Tether" in 1902. i Conrad's hope that each of his books might be the one which 1 would turn the tide of public opinion in his favor slowly waned, I until the despair, which had followed each unsuccessful book, j became stronger and stronger and was more and more reflected in his attitudes toward his readers, his critics, and his publishers. Finally, his despair over the many difficulties he had to face 1 I became so great that, as Hueffer has suggested, it may well have adversely affected his writing. CHAPTER V I I RECEPTION OF CONRAD’S WRITINGS FROM 1912 THROUGH 1915 Besides A Personal Record (1912) Conrad published three books during the period 1912-1915* 'Twixt Land and Sea (1912) contained three stories: "A Smile of Fortune," "The Secret Sharer," and "Freya of the Seven Isles." All of these were stories with sea-faring people as their principal characters. "A Smile of Fortune" was an account (told in the first person) of a captain’s flirtation with 1 j the petulant daughter of a ship chandler who forced him to buy an j oversupply of potatoes which he later sold at a huge profit. "The i Secret Sharer," another story told in the first person, was an j ! * intense, psychological study of the effect on a sea captain of his experiences in helping a fugitive who is identical to himself in appearance escape justice. "Freya of the Seven Isles" was an account 1 of the love affair between a yachtsman and his lady which was brought j to a tragic close because of the perfidy of a jealous rival. Chance 1 (1914), Conrad’s first novel with a happy ending, told the story of ! ! how a young woman's marriage to a British sea captain was nearly destroyed because of her father’s hatred for her husband. Although t her husband was later drowned in a shipwreck, she was to find 1 f 1 t ! consolation in marriage to a young chief mate who had been a close I I friend to her husband. Victory (1915) was a novel in which a ; j melancholy Swede, talight by his father ±0 remain aloof from human : affairs, had exiled himself on an island in the Southwest Pacific 1 I Ocean, where he learned through the dramatic self-sacrifice of a I 210 woman who loved him that he should have "put his trust in life." "I am going to begin tomorrow a short story," Conrad wrote Galsworthy in May, 1910j "it's to be comical in a nautical setting and its subject is (or are) potatoes. Title: ’A Smile of Fortune.1 May it be a good omen!The statement characteristically reveals both Conrad's hope and his despair about his chances of ever writing fiction that would bring him a reasonable material reward. In thi s instance, however, the title proved to be a good omen. When "A Smile of Fortune" appeared with the other stories in 'Twixt Land and Sea in j the summer of 1912, it found many more readers than any previous j story Conrad had written. In fact, during 1912 through 1915 Conrad's j j fortunes rose so rapidly that Victory, in 191!} is even more to be ; regarded as a good omen. "It is a pleasing and legitimate fancy to see in the title of Victory a fortunate coincidence," wrote Bichard Curie, who the year before had published the first boo,k-length appreciation of Conrad's writings. "For after twenty years of a , laborious life the victory remains with him, and his work, long j unnoticed by the world, has proved at last its own unquestioned and ! I 2 } splendid justification." Although it is difficult to document precisely the magnitude of I iConrad's triumph, enough reliable information is available to show j that his books began during the years after mid-1912 to be read by j | many new readers. Mr. L. C. Brown, of Dent and Company, Ltd.,-wrote 1 ^Life and Letters, II, 108. 2Beview of Victory, Fortnightly Review, CIV (October, 1915), 678. J 211 me that 'Twixt Land and Sea had a first printing of 14,330 copies in 1912, a large enough initial printing that a new one was not made untlL 1923. Mr. J. W. Boberts, of Methuen and Company, Ltd., wrote me that printings of Chance were made by his company on January 15, 1914, on February 17, 1916, and on August 1, 1916, and that printings of Victory were made on September 24, 1915, and on May 10, 1919* Wise's figure of 3,000 copies (the only one I have found) for an initial printing of Chance seems likely in view of Mr. Boberts's statement that two more printings had to be made two years later, and his 1 t higher figure of 10,000 copies for the first printing of Victory also 3 seems likely, since the later novel was not reprinted until 1919* j The reprintings of Chance in 1916 must have been large, for Hueffer stated that 14,000 copies of it had been sold "by the time of the 4 First Battle of the Somme." Conrad's statement to Colvin about j Victory ("The book has made a good start, 11,000 copies having been j sold in the first 3 days--a rather extraordinary success for--Yours 5 ever, Joseph Conrad"), if correct, makes Wise's figure for the I ; initial printing somewhat low. I It is clear, at any rate, that with the publication of Victory in 1915 Conrad's popularity with English readers became assured. , l I i I ~ > k Bibliography of the Writings of Joseph Conrad (1895-1920) London: printed for private circulation only by B. Clay and Sons, 1920), pp. 50 and 63. 4 , 1 Thus to Bevisit: Some Beminiscences (London: Chapman and Hall, \ 1926), 79. ^E. V. Lucas, The Colvins and Their Friends (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1928), p. 305. 212 Interesting, even though, slight, evidence of this is apparent in the entry which Arnold Bennett made in his journal June 8, 1916: Came to London Tuesday morning for the Wounded Allies’ "War Fair" at the Caledonian Market. ... I sold books at M.'s stall. After 5*30, crowds of young women came to look at books and some,to buy. . . . Demand for Kipling, Chesterton, Conrad and me. The size and frequency of printings of the three books of this period may have been equally great in the United States, but it is impossible to be certain of this. Miss Helen Crosby, of the Publicity Department of Doubleday and Company, the firm which published the j j three books in this country, wrote me that information on printings | t and sales of these books is not now available. 5 Because of the increased sale of his books, Conrad’s financial I position improved quickly. On June 28, 1912, he wrote Galsworthy t that Dent was to publish his 'Twixt Land and Sea in August. "Pinker J has done well with them as serials and Dent pays an advance of 200 j land a royalty of 25$. The best terms I've ever had for stories," said , I 7 j Conrad. On June 2, 1913> he wrote Pinker, "Chance hag served our turn 1 -- l,k00 or so— thanks to Hugh Clifford, to whom I intend to dedicate j 1 it," and on May 5, 191^} he wrote Galsworthy that Pinker had been able to get "a net 1,000" for Victory and that there would still "be 8 1 something more from Chance ♦" There seems also to have been "something1 more" from Victory, for Conrad told Hamlin Garland several years The Journal of Arnold Bennett (New York: The Literary Guild, | 1933), P. 593. ^Life and Letters, II, 1^1. ^Life and Letters, II, 1^6 and 15^. \ 213 later that the American publisher Munsey had paid him six thousand 9 dollars for the magazine rights to Victory. Conrad*s future security was further assured during these years "by a satisfactory arrangement with his new English publisher, Dent and Company. With evident pleasure he was able, in 1913, to describe to Galsworthy , ( the Dent contract, 3 novels at 700 each, which with Am. rights," would make "nearly 1,000 each, apart from the serial possibilities."^ Finally, in the same letter in 191^ in which he told Galsworthy of the favorable terms Pinker had secured for Victory, he was able to make the following■ declaration of financial solvency: When the novel is finished (say in a month) Pinker will be paid off and there shall be three or four hundred in hand, with a vol. of short stories ready to publish,— as a stand-by.1- 1 - I To Conrad's credit it must be said that in achieving popular ; i success, he did not relinquish his reputation as a writer of the first rank. During this period, as during earlier years, there was much Lttention to his devotion to high literary principles and to his J i originality as a writer. In commenting upon 'Twixt Land and Sea the .Saturday Beview stated^ "He brings a combination of qualities for J I IP 1 which one looks in vain elsewhere." Several reviews of Chance ! contained similar comments. The American Monthly Review of Reviews | I stated that Conrad, "the eminent English novelist," was "a master of I : ! ^Hamlin Garland, My Friendly Contemporaries: A Literary Log (New j York: The Macmillan Company, 1932), 533* ^ ^Life and Letters, II, 1^5• ‘ L1Life and Letters, II, 15^. | ^Saturday Review, CXIV (October 19, 1912), ^92. ' 214 his craft," and cited earlier praise of Conrad "by Galsworthy and 13 Huneker. The Atlantic Monthly declared, "The author's place is high among the half-dozen novelists of the era who offer intellectual 14 stimulus rather than emotional relaxation." The Outlook said, "For 15 subtlety of art no one now writing fiction approaches Conrad." And the Literary Digest said, "His power is well known, and a Conrad 16 story always stands for the best in contemporary literature." Several reviews of A Set of Six (which had not until 1915 been published in its entirety in the United States) and Victory contained similar comments. In its review of A Set of Six the New York Times / ' 1 " ..... said: It is difficult to think off-hand of any American or English novelist now writing whose work is at once so entertaining, so true psychologically, and so worth while from a truly artistic point of view, as that of Joseph Conrad.17 In commenting on the same volume, the Catholic World said, "All his stories show the author's fertile imagination, acute observation of | life, his mastery of character analysis and his unique style."1® The Boston Evening Transcript, after designating Victory "typical of j Mr. Conrad's powers, and an emphatic revelation of his originality," 1 j declared, "One of the greatnesses of Mr. Conrad is that there is no 1 1 q XLIX (March, 1914), 373* 14 CCIV (October, 191*0, 530. 15CVII (May 2, 1914), 45. T ^ XLVIII (May 9, 191*0, 1U9. ^(January 31, 1915), P. 38. l8C (March, 1915), 825. 215 19 novelist like him." And of the same novel the Literary Digest said: There is never anything conventional or commonplace about Mr. Conrad's stories. His themes are original, his style is distinctive, and his technique exceptional. With the finished story comes the feeling that a. master mind is behind the scenes.^® In commenting upon Victory, Grace Isabel Colbron said in the Atlantic Monthly: To be able to project one's self thus into this or that human situation, to saturate one’s self with it, to give forth com pletely, is art indeed, but art at such a marvelous pitch that it deserves some other, some yet greater name. ^ j Conrad' s originality and the high quality of his writing was : also commented on by writers of longer criticisms. In an article on j his writings that appeared in the New York Times in 1913, Warrington j Dawson said, "He has attained such distinctive excellence that he is ' I ranked among the masters of style as well as among the leaders in the literary art of our period." He further said that Edmund Gosse had recently included him "with Thomas Hardy and Geroge Meredith as the 1 2 2 i great triumvirate of contemporaneous fiction. ' Slightly over a year later, H. W. Boynton wrote in an appreciation of Conrad which i appeared in the Nation: I ! Conrad's place among current English writers is peculiar. It j is detached, and a little aloof. It represents a literary ' career virtually contemporary with that of the group of I brilliant irresponsibles which, during the past decade, has , i ' 19 I (March 2k, 1915), P* 24. 2 0 I L (April 17, 1915), 885. I PI 1 CXVI (October, 1915), 511. | ^(February 2, 1913), P» 51 • '2161 so joyously and consciously dominated the scene. Shaw is not Chesterton, and Chesterton is not Bennett; hut they and their comrades in brilliancy are confessedly all of a piece in their attitude towards the public. Amuse the brute.... Why be a homely slighted shepherd when one knows how to be a headliner. . . . Joseph Conrad is a name which, by the general impression, stands for fine and strong work, and for an uncommonly interest ing personality. Mention him in any company and you find him I cheerfully conceded a place at or near "the head” in contemporary literature.23 Also in 191**-, James Huneker opened his study of Conrad— one of the first appreciations of Conrad by a major American critic--with these lines: ! In these piping days when fiction plays the handmaid or prophet 1 to various propaganda; when the majority of writers are trying I to prove something, or are acting as vendors of some new-fangled 1 social nostrums; when the insistent drums of the Great God . Reclame are bruising human tympani, the figure of Joseph Conrad ; stands solitary among English novelists as the ideal of a pure ; and disinterested artist.2^- Corroboration was given Huneker*s appraisal of Conrad's work a few ’ months later by another American critic, Van Wyck Brooks, who said: Conrad has done in the English tongue. . . . several hitherto impossible things. He has been, as Mr. Curie says, "thrillingly" j romantic, without one lapse into sentimentality, without a 1 moment's departure from the most rigorous moral austerity. ... He has, unlike Henry James and every other writer who in this respect approaches him, combined the utmost subtlety of style j with an exclusive interest in the large issues. He has pre served the elemental integrity which as a rule springs from being rooted in one spot and growing out of it, as the novels I of Hardy grow, through an experience of the earth's surface | greater than that of Stevenson or even of Pierre Loti. More- | over. . . he has acclimatized in our own language the very I mood for which we have gone to Russian literature.2? 23XCVIII (April 9, 191*0, 395* pit "The Genius of Joseph Conrad," North American Review. CC (August, 191^), 27O. 2^Review of Richard Curie’s Joseph Conrad: A Study. New Republic. I (December 26, 191*0, 26. 217 In his book on Conrad, also published in 191^, Richard Curie began by comparing Conrad's -work, which he felt "actually marked a new epoch," with that of his contemporaries. He maintained that Stevenson "sailed over the surface, little guessing of the tragic depths to be plumbed by men like Conrad”; that Conrad was a "philosopher where Kipling was an observer"; and that Shaw, Wells, and Galsworthy had "given England what English readers wanted, . . . brilliance" or "a problem," whereas Conrad was "not concerned with righting the world" I and was "not sparkling," but was instead "the novelist of real people." "What dif jferentia.tes Conrad from all his contemporaries is the quality , i 1 I ; of greatness," said Curie. "He is on a different plane, as it were, 1 ! and therefore comparisons are almost certain to miss the point.| i Curie devoted a chapter of his book to a study of the artistry of Conrad, who he felt would "never be popular in the sense that the greatest novelists were popular" ... because Conrad, "the most incorruptible of artists," could not be "lured from his aim by the 27 promise of a great reward— the reward of universal esteem." j "Broadly speaking," he continued, "Conrad is an artist because he j ; sees his work in focus and in relation not alone to art but to 1 ! life." Twice within the chapter he mentioned Conrad*s "genius," ! which he praised as follows: i » [ ! One of the secrets of his genius ... is his dramatic intensity . . . his marvelous power of throwing his own vitality over his 1 26 ' Joseph Conrad: A Study (New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 191k), pp. 1-1^. | 2TP. 107, 218 work, of making his descriptions, his crises, his whole picture, thrilling. I want to express here my chief ground for believing in Conrad*s genius. And it is this. He has the power, very- astonishing and very rare, of extracting from a thing already intensely dramatic a further and unimagined eloquence. Conrad was also accorded a high place among writers by Wilson Follett, whose book Joseph Conrad: A Short Study was published in the United States in 1915• After quoting from Conrad’s own creed as he had expressed it in the Preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus— to snatch in a moment of courage from the remorseless rush of time, a passing phase of life, is only the beginning of the task. The task approached in tenderness and in faith is to hold up unquestioningly, without choice and without fear, the rescued fragment before all eyes and in the light of a sincere mood-- 1 he praised the excerpt as "an early confession of faith never for an instant relinquished." "Nothing more is needed to fix and formulate the notion of the artistic web or pattern, not as determined by isolated ’technique,*" he said, "but as the ready responsiveness of a plastic substance to the mould of life— life, ... as scanned 29 through our author’s temperament and its derivative, his theory." Follett held that Conrad’s dedication to his creed made him distinc tive among his contemporaries, for he said further: Not in our younger generation, surely, is there so consistent a rapprochement between life and its miniattire self, art, or so clear a case of the endless ingenuities of art used so exclusively to ±±b single end of disentangling and making 28 Pp. 200 and 215. 29(New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 1915), pp. 77-78 30 ^ clear the heart of truth. In attempting to examine particular features of Conradfs writing, Follett further applied Conrad’s own test to his practice. "Not the manifestation, ... but the hidden source is the artist’s truth, to which every surface aspect is no more than an index," he said in speaking of Conrad’s characterizations. "Such resolute and vigorous resignation is the general import of the sincere mood which Mr. Conrad 31 applies to one after another specific instance or phase of life." But Follett objected to classifying Conrad "as a supreme master of the ! i I individual encounter," saying: ; He will have more and more to be defended as a master not of the \ specific at all but of the general; as an exponent of the fine modern art of making the story illustrational of something j ! greater than itself, without at the same time making it didactic.32 As a final tribute to Conrad, Follett praised him for the quality of j I his originality. "A part of Mr. Conrad's distinction is indeed that j he has done many things in new ways," he said; "but the greatest part after all is that, in the decisive matter of determining what things shall be done, to insist on the new has not been to insist on the , little."33 ! 1 Adverse criticism of certain features of Conrad's work, which I some critics had made during earlier periods, tended during the years I from mid-1912 through 1915 to be less frequently made, or tended when * 30P. 79- I 31Pp. 83-85. 32 ° P. 107, 33P. 109. 220 made by some critics, to be effectively answered by others. At the beginning of this period, for example, the notion was not uncommon that Conrad's women were less fully developed as characters than his men and that Conra-d could not, or seldom did, portray romance between the two that would interest the common reader. Conrad's status in this particular may have been accurately reflected just before the appearance of Chance by Grace Isabel Colbron in her article entitled 1 "Joseph Conrad’s Women." Miss Colbron declared that Conrad's women I j were put into his books "just as one more, possibly often the most i j potent, force of nature, acting on and influencing the development ; 1 of the male protagonist--never because of themselves or of what may ; i : happen to them." She further maintained that they "were never I f complex" and seemed incapable of development. "Swayed only by primal • q l j . ' Impulses," she said, "they are always true to type, to themselves."-^ Richard Curie stated during the same year that Conrad was "not solely ; I i preoccupied with the emotion of love" in his writings, and for that I 35 I reason he did not think Conrad would "ever be popular." During | the next year Arthur Symons spoke of the inferior place of women in I ; J Conrad’s novels as follows: j It is strange but true that Conrad's men are more subtly comprehended and more magnificent than his women. ... To j Conrad there is an unbounded depth in a man’s soul; a woman ] is a definite creature, easily indicated. . . . It is only men who can be represented heroically upon the stage of life; who 1 can be seen adventuring doggedly and irresistibly, by sheer , will and purpose; it is only given to men to attain a visible ^Bookman, XXXVIII (January, 191*0, *+76. 35Curle, p. 9. 221 glory of achievement. He sees woman as a . parasite or an idol, one of the illusions.3° James Huneker, in partial agreement with Symons, said: That Conrad succeeds better with his men is a commonplace of all masculine writers. ... To many masters of imaginative literature woman is usually a poet’s evocation, not the creature of flesh in real life. But he has painted some full-length portraits and ma.de many life-like sketches, which are inevitable. ... You know they live, that some of them go on marching in your memory after the book has been closed.3' In Alice, his young woman in ”A Smile of Fortune," the first story of this period, some critics recognized that Conrad had created a woman who might appeal to a reader different from the reader of Conrad’s earlier books. Although I have not been able to find the reviews in which such statements were made, Conrad's reaction to the {suggestion is indicated in a letter he wrote to Galsworthy. "As to I (the girl Alice, they agree in calling her a ’sensual animal,*— goodness : knows -why," said Conrad. "I tried to make her pathetic. Not being I ,.38 |Very well just now I have been ridiculously irritated by that view. To the possibility that new readers were attracted to Conrad’s fwriting by a woman so described might be added another attraction in the form of the dust jacket in which Chance appeared somewhat over a year later. After Conrad's popular success had long been assured, {Edward Garnett wrote, "It is probable that the figure of the lady on !the ‘jacket’ of Chance (191*1-) did more to bring the novel into popular j 39 (favour than the long review by Sir Sidney Colvin in The Observer«" t 36Forum, LIII (May, 1915), 582. 3^North American Beview, CC (August, 191*0, 277* 3^Life and Letters, II, 1**4. 39 Letters from Conrad, p. xx. _________ i 222 More tangible evidence of Conrad's greater success with his characterizations of women and with his romances of men and women. during this period was presented in the reviews of these years. In its review of 'Twixt Land and Sea, the Spectator said: It is ... in the last story, "Freya of the Seven Isles," that Mr. Conrad achieves his greatest success. Its elements may seem simple and familiar— two lovers, a jealous rival, and a comic father— but its jtrue elements are different. They are passion and imagination. Favorable comments on the characterization of Flora de Barral, the heroine in Chance, were made in the Athenaeum and in the Saturday I I I Review. "Mr. Conrad succeeds to a remarkable degree in suggesting 4l this girl's outlook upon the world," said the first periodical, 1 I j Jwhile the second said, "All the characters, especially Flora, are excellently drawn. In the opinion of many critics, though, Victory was the novel in j which Conrad really established himself as a creator of women and as ^ a dramatizer of romance between men and women. Grace Isabel Colbron, who a year earlier had so adversely criticized the women characters of , i i jConrad's novels, declared, "Character development is Improved here, I 43 I jeven in the case of Lena." The Athenaeum wrote that Lena was "one i 44 [of the most pathetic characters in the gallery of fiction." The ! ^°CIX (November 16, 1912), 8l6. January 17, 1914), pt. 1, p. 89. hO ; CXVII (January 24, 1914), 117. ^Review of Victory, Atlantic Monthly, XLI (May, 1915), 323. ^(September, 1915), pt. 2, p. 208. I 223 New Republic said, "Conrad affirms loveliness as vividly as— that easier affirmation— he affirms the horrible. His women, like Lena, like Flora, like Adele de Valmassique— are tense with life at its i i < = > best." The Nation exclaimed: I I Perhaps if you are well-read in your Conrad, you think you know already what the girl is like. . . . Perhaps. Only it is fairly certain that when you first meet Heyst*s girl (in white muslin) coming down the platform to mingle with the guests of Schomberg’s mean hotel at Sourabaya, you are in no more danger of recognizing her as an old acquaintance than was Enchanted Heyst himself. ° Lena's role in the action of the book was commented upon in several periodicals. "Though Lena is by no means an important visible factor in the book," said the New York Times, "she appears in less |than a fourth of its bulk— we feel after we have finished it as though 1 she is a floating, permeating essence." Her relationship with Heyst, | it further said, made readers of the book "feel a keen sense of the < eternal lack of adjustment between man's love and woman's, between his I i ^ 4 - 7 'dreams and her realities." Curie, in his review of the book, wrote, j"There is something epic in this story of antagonistic devotion, in I k8 [this study of feminine and masculine psychology." The Atlantic I | Monthly said: I I ' Lena and Heyst are two persons whose lives would not be worth . two inches of newspaper space at the most. Conrad takes these j negligible folk, their remote beginnings, their horror-smeared end, and soaks himself in the subject till he can give off t ^5II (April 17, 1915), 7. ^C (April 15, 1915), ^(March 28, 1915), HO. ; ^"Joseph Conrad and Victory,” Fortnightly Review. CIV (October, \ 1915), 672. ' 22k ! nothing about them that is not loaded with absorbing interest, with profound significance. He makes a great drama, charged with pity and terror, of these few weeks of their hidden life noving swiftly to its end. 9 The London Bookman devoted its praise particularly to Lena's role in the final victory. "There is nothing cheap, banal, or commonplace about this act of self-sacrifice," it said. "The death scene is the most beautiful thing Mr. Conrad has ever written."^ Similarly I enthusiastic, the American Monthly Be view of Beviews said of the end of the novel, "The darkness lifts, and triumphant through defeat and 51 shame, the soul rises to the eternal 'victory' through eternal love." I Less attention was paid during these years to what Conrad had previously given as a major reason for his limited popularity— his I j"foreignism." The Nation said of 'Twixt Land and Sea; ! The exotic flavor of these stories is not wholly due to their i | setting. Though this writer long ago chose English for his | | medium, his masters are not more English than Polish, but j French. There are whole pages in the present volume which ! have the effect of a translation, a very beautiful and almost concealed translation, from the tongue of Gautier and Maupassant.52 iThe Outlook, in a review of Chance, called Conrad "a past master ... I in the skilled use of language to produce a planned effect" and i ,declared that this was "the more remarkable in that he did not know a I 53 jword of English until he was nineteen." Warrington Dawson also j ! k9 | I CXVI (October, 1915), 5H j | 5°XLIX (October, 1915), 21. ; 51 i LI (June, 1915), 761. 1 52 XCVI (April 10, 1913), 360. 53CVII (May 2, 1911 *-), ^5. ! during this period expressed surprise that Conrad had become such a master of English, since he had "never heard English until he was 5^- fifteen years of age." And Bichard Curie, in his book on Conrad, stated that Conrad’s "tradition" was "largely the Franco-Slav tradition," one "quite outside the venue of English genius," which made it "easier for a Frenchman to understand Conrad than it would be 55 for an Englishman." Expressions of this type were infrequent, however, particularly as compared with those of earlier periods, and Conrad’s objection that he had become typed as a "literary freak" because of his foreignness seems to have been less justified during j the years from mid-1912 through 1915 than it might have been during J the earlier years, when interest in his past life was keener. t ! Although the unrelieved seriousness, or sombreness, of tone, of ! Conrad's writing was commented upon by several critics of this period, his mastery of this feature of his work was at least given full recognition by Arthur Symons toward the end of this period. Before the appearance of Symons’s article, however, several critics called attention to it in a manner not unlike that of earlier periods. "There are no half-measures for Mr. Conrad," the Athenaeum said of ; ’Twixt Land and Sea; "the stories in this volume are tragedies, vivid : and penetrating." The Outlook said of Chance: ; Mr. F. P. Adams, the humorist, in his "Tribune" column lately asked to be told why he doesn’t care for Conrad when he knows > '^’ "Joseph Conrad," New York Times (February 2, 1913), P* 51* ^■'Curle, p. 223 and p. 226. 56(October 19, 1912), pt. 2, p. W-6. 226] that he ought to care for him. Probably the reason is that Mr. Adams is a humorist and Conrad hasn’t, in this book at least, a glimmer of humor in his -way of looking at life. . . . A little cheerfulness would have made "Chance" an easier book to read.57 In its review of the same novel the Independent said: The story goes deep into dark emotional caverns and drags out intimate, frightened, unwholesome thoughts, dangles them pitilessly in a glare of sun and laughs at their shame-faced antics.5” William Morton Payne said that the story in Victory was told with "the author’s grim strength" and had no "trace of the sentimental I palaver with which a lesser writer would beslobber its tense j I 59 * situations." j Both Curie and Follett recognized also the seriousness of tone j j in Conrad's writings. Conrad’s male characters "especially drew upon | ! a type of mind to whom the domination of one idea" had "a terrible \ ! I I attraction," Curie believed. Conrad based this, he felt, on the \ I "belief that beneath the usual world of sanity and good will there was an immense under-world of darkness and unrest." "His philosophy I of character is often optimistic, his philosophy of life invariably I 6 o f J pessimistic," Curie said in speaking of Conrad "as psychologist." And later, in speaking of Conrad "as artist," he said, "Conrad, | ■ indeed, must be placed amongst the great tragic writers." Follett ^ i i j t I 57CVII (May 2, 191*0, ^5- j 58LXXVIII (April 27, 191*0, 173. j 59Dial, LVIII (May 13, 1915), 38^. ; 60 ! Curie, p. 93• ^Curle, p. 207. ! 227 commented on the "tempered melancholy" of Conrad's writing, which he said -was explained by the patriot exiled from his homeland, itself a sacred lost cause; the seaman exiled from the sea; the citizen of the world search ing his own spirit for a habitation not discoverable in the world- purpose— not one of these but all of these. More than any other critic of this period, however, Arthur Symons concerned himself with examining fully this feature of Conrad's work. He opened his article on Conrad by saying: Conrad's inexplicable mind has created for itself a secret world to live in, some corner stealthily hidden away from view, among impenetrable forests, on the banks of untraveled rivers. From that corner, like a spider in his web, he throws out tentacles into the darkness; he gathers in his spoils, he collects them like a miser, stripping from them their dreams and visions to decorate his web magnificently. He chooses among them, and sends out into the world shadowy messengers, for the troubling of the peace of man, self-satisfied in his ignorance of the invisible. At the centre of his Veb sits an i elemental sarcasm discussing human affairs with a calm and cynical ferocity; "that particular field whose mission is to jog the memories of men, lest they forget the meaning of life." Behind that sarcasm crouches some ghastly influence, outside J humanity, some powerful devil, invisible, poisonous, irresist ible, spawning evil for his delight. They guard this secret corner of the world with mists and delusions, so that very few of those to whom the shadowy messengers have revealed them selves can come nearer than the outer edge of it.°3 ! Symons felt that Conrad's wisdom was the cause of his sober view of i : the world, but felt that his "deptlh. of wisdom must terrify those who j read him for entertainment." "Reality, to Conrad, is non-existent," t he said in one place; "he sees through it into the realm of the I : unknown: a world that is comforting and bewildering, a world of holy 1 terror filled with ghosts and devils." And in another place he said, ^Follett, p. 38. 63"Conrad," Forum. LIII (May, 1915), 579. 228 The world for those who live in it, is a damp forest, where savagery and civilization meet, and in vain try to mingle. Only the sea, when they are out of sight of land, sometimes gives them freedom. ] | "To read Conrad,” said Symons finally, "is to shudder on the edge of eh a gulf, in a silent darkness." Comments hy critics of this period on the psychological feature in Conrad’s work indicate that many of them felt either that his work of this period was psychologically less complex than his work of the years 190^ to mid-1912 or that he had achieved greater mastery of i this feature of his latest work. In reviews of ’Twixt Land and Sea "TTTT" '' ' L I ! the first belief was especially noticeable. The Spectator, for j example, wrote: i In one or two of the latest of Mr. Conrad’s books some of his admirers have noticed with consternation signs of new and by no means happy developments in his matter and style. This change first became evident in The Secret Agent, which, for all its brilliance and interest, lacked except for a few pages, the > especial signs of its author’s genius. Oddly enough, the most I J marked element in the new manner seemed to be the influence of I a writer as far removed as possible in his inspiration from that | of Mr. Conrad— the influence, we mean of Mr. Henry James. ... I The Secret Agent seemed often to echo Mr. Henry James, not j merely in the characteristic formation of his sentences, but I even in his equally characteristic method of character-painting. ! And, whatever may be the value of Mr. James's surreptitious permeation into English literature in general, upon Mr. Conrad [ the effect was entirely lamentable. It is with deep satisfac tion therefore that we see that in his new book he has once more shaken himself free. He has returned with fresh vigour to his earlier course, and is as triumphantly successful in it | . as he has ever been in the past.°5 | I ' In its review of ’Twixt Land and Sea the Outlook showed a preference j for the early writings of Conrad in which characterization and fh Forum, LIII (May, 1915), PP» 579, 581, and 585* 65CIX (November 16, 1912), 815. 229 atmosphere were more nearly balanced, by declaring, "He has never painted more vivid scenes of nature or looked more deeply into the 66 hearts of his characters than in this moving book." More interested in Conrad1s economical method of presenting character in the stories of ’Twixt Land and Sea, the Athenaeum said, "Mr. Conrad paints character in a flash; a word, an act, an idiosyncrasy, and the man or woman he is portraying lives; it would be interesting to see a play from his pen." Favorable comments on Conrad’s characterizations in Chance and i i Victory further indicate that a number of critics of this period felt j I that Conrad had become a surer master of the psychological aspect of j his work. The Independent said that Conrad did "not probe his characters alone," but delved "equally into himself" and "laid bare i the human." Therefore, it suggested, "At times, in the greatest 68 ecstasy of his analysis he is classic, universal." The Saturday Review called his characters "excellently drawn." The Athenaeum closed its review with the statement: "When all is said, 'Chance* ,,69 ' remains a powerful and fascinating study in psychology. In 1 ! commenting upon Victory in the New Republic it was said: j Conrad has chosen to create life in characters of such potent j spirit, good or bad, that his subject becomes a state of soul, i although his stories may abound in incident, sometimes like a I I : l 1 66 I CIII (March 15, 1913), 596. j ^(October 19, 1912), pt. 2, p. 446. ; 68 LXXVIII (April 27, 1914), 173. 69 (January 17, 1914), pt. 1, p. 89. 230 bad dream. Captain Anthony’s power of love and pity dominates the various actions of Chance. ... In Victory. murder, robbery, degraded passions, and insanity furnish incidents that are but as handmaidens to Axel Heyst's tragic powerlessness to trust in life, to give himself away.TO Conrad's mastery of the psychological aspect of his work was \ recognized several times during this period by Bichard Curie. "Conrad is an imaginative realist, a romantic psychologist. And his psychology is very exactly followed up. In Victory, for instance, the characters talk all the time but they never get mixed," he wrote in his review of Victory. He then added: I He prepares elaborately the way for his characters, and even when I they are on the stage he throws around them still another atmos- ; phere— the double-distilled essence of their own personality. t In his book on Conrad during this period he said: "Conrad invests his characters to a very marked degree with the atmosphere of their own j 72 personality." And later in the same work he said: tty general impression is simply this— that Conrad is a very j great psychologist. I admit that there is a good deal of melo drama in his earlier portraits, and a good deal of -unnecessary irony in his later portraits, but the essentials of psychology --the realism, the creation, the detail, the comprehension— are always there. And after all, such melodrama as Conrad*s is but the overflow of romance and such irony as Conrad’s is but the wisdom of the highest originality. Perfect balance is seldom indicative of the highest originality.73 Huneker also recognized Conrad’s power as a psychologist, but could not divorce it from his ability to write of the sea. "Conrad is a 7°II (April 17, 1915), 6. fortnightly Beview, CIV (October, 1915), 676. T2P. 82. 73P. 14k. 231 painter doubled by a psychologist," he said; "he is the psychologist of the sea— and that is his chief claim to originality, his Peak of 74 Darien. He knows and records its pulse-beat. Even more noticeable than the favorable comments on Conrad's surer work as a psychologist during this period were the favorable comments on his narrative method. It would be too much, of course, to expect objections like those of earlier years not to appear now and then during this period, and, of course, some objections were made. In commenting upon 'Twixt Land and Sea,the Athenaeum complained, "He 1 seems to write at white heat— almost fiercely, as if defying contra- i 75 (diction— and sometimes under-estimates his prospective reader." Of \ i Chance,the same magazine objected: ! I t The craftsmanship of Mr. Conrad's new novel is somewhat marred I by the curious device he has employed in the telling of it. ; One person tells the story in the first person to another, who | occasionally interjects a remark, also in the first person. , J When it is added that the narrator is supposed to have gathered I his details from various sources, it will be understood that the thread is sometimes difficult to follow.7° The Saturday Beview objected that in Victory Conrad did "not let I himself go enough," but obeyed "too meekly the painful methods of 1 Flaubert, as Pascal obeyed too often the saintly self-torment that 77 ; pressed iron spikes into his unoffending body.'"' i ; I 1 Statements regarding the complexity of Conrad's narrative method 1 ' i I or the difficulty it might cause the casual reader were also made by j i | ' 74 Worth American Beview, CC (August, 191*0, 270. 1 .....1 ■ n 1 ~ 1 1 l T5 (October 19, 1912), pt. 2, p. Mi-6. 76 (January 17, 191*0, pt. 1, p. 89. 77CXX (September 25,_1915)._298. __________________________ some of the leading critics of this period. H. W. Boynton, for instance, said, "Persons who insist on ’a straight story’ and who do \ not respond to subtleties of feeling or atmosphere, will make very 78 little out of such a tale as ’Lord Jim* or 'Chance.'" Similarly impressed, Van Wyck Brooks stated, "Surely Conrad, both in style and in theme is the most fugue-like of writers, returning upon himself, embroidering and re-embroidering the substance of which it is one 79 of his chief glories to be so economical." "To read Conrad calls for exertion, and nowadays that is enough to damn anyone," said Richard Curie. "The exertion arises from the fact that he is imaginative, and requires, in his readers, a corresponding and I 3o increasing effort of the imagination." "He compels his public to read him creatively, with mind intensely operative," said Follett, 8l "and, having done that, to read him again." But opposed to such occasional affirmations of the difficulty of j reading Conrad because of the complexity of his narrative method were ;many statements to the effect that he had returned to his earlier and i 1 more direct method of story-telling, or that he had achieved greater mastery over the indirect method which had been so characteristic of his work from 1904 •until mid-1912. In its review of 'Twixt Land and Sea, the Outlook for example, declared: Nation, XCVIII (April 9, 191^), 397. 79 Review of Richard Curie's Joseph Conrad, Hew Republic, I (December 26, 1914), 26. : 80 Joseph Conrad, p. 3. 8! . Follett, p. 74. 233 Mr. Conrad is here seen at his very best— and most excellent literary art his best is. One is inclined to think that the romantic tale fits his manner better than the elaborate book-, romance, for in the latter his tendency to involution is apt to carry him beyond the limit of the reader's patience.®2 j | Of Victory William Morton Payne wrote, ’ ’ The new book is a character- ! istic Conrad tale, told with somewhat less of indirection than ,,83 usual. George Middleton, commenting upon The Nigger of the Nar cissus, which had just been reprinted in the United States, took the occasion to compare Conrad's early with his later method. "The I early book is told in the accepted canons of story-telling: it is I direct narrative, at least," he said; "while in Chance, as in Lord Jim and others he pieces his story out.through indirection, which to j ’ 1 some readers is a. difficult method no matter the verisimilitude 1 8k ‘ : o( gained." More frequent during this period though were statements, by j j critics who felt that Conrad was by then a master of the indirect I ! , method of narration. In its review of 'Twixt Land and Sea, the , Saturday Review stated: j No small part of Mr. Conrad's art is shown by the way in which j he uses these seemingly artless narrators, producing exactly ! the impression he requires from*their sequestered simplicity, ; and, without loss to that or to their character,‘investing : their point of view with a delicacy of sentiment and of I language which leave nothing essential unpresented or unsaid. ' ... Without such'art Mr. Conrad could not have told the > j story in the fashion from which it gains so much. 5 1 I j i 82 : CIII (March 15, 1913), 596. ! ’ j ; 83Pial, LVTII (May 13, 1915), 38*K 8k . Bookman, XXXIX (July, 19lk), 565 » ^Saturday Beview, CXIV (October, 19, 1912), k93 . 2'3h Of the same novel the London Bookman said: The most remarkable quality of Mr. Joseph Conrad1 s new set of long-short stories, 1Twixt Land and Sea, is the ease and sim plicity of the language. ... He used to be a melancholy amateur of the picturesquely violent side of life vainly trying to masquerade as a simple seaman. His earlier work owed obvious debts to all kinds of literary influences, chiefly Zola’s and Maupassant's and that of the Eussian school of abnormal psychological novelists. . . . His authenticity of imagination was somewhat over-laid by the various evidences of his literary apprenticeship. ... His art now owes nothing to anybody: it is distinct, incisive, and yet suggestive of a thousand things left unsaid, while in appearance it is casual to the point of slip shodness. Sach tale, we think, is likely to stick forever in j the memory of the reader. ! ! In its comment upon Chance, the Atlantic Monthly gave this virtual i history of Conrad's fortunes as a writer: Chance indicates that Joseph Conrad is now choosing subjects | somewhat closer to everyday life. He has been turning out > admirable fiction for the last eighteen years or so, and is ; only now coming into his reward. Popularity tarried, because at first he wrote of elemental passions and strange lands with j the psychological acuteness and complex style of Henry James. | It then compared Lord Jim with Chance and found the first "a more 1 astonishing piece of work than Chance," though the later novel was "subtle, deft, and strong." In conclusion, the Atlantic Monthly said: It also takes the reader into the novelist's laboratory and shows him how the trick is turned. The myriad acute deductions from a few observed facts remind one of the sublimated guesswork of The Sacred Fount, but unlike ^hat masterpiece of intangibility, i they do not make one’s head swim. ' [ I The Spectator, primarily interested in Conrad’s use of Marlow ' and other narrators in Chance, said: | All these characters and many more are revealed to us in the j j 8%LIII (December, 1912), 187. j 87CCIV (October, 191*0, 530.__________ J 235 peculiar oblique mode of narration habitually affected by Mr. Conrad, which gives us the events always at the second remove, and sometimes at the third. .. . The method depends chiefly on Marlow— as we need hardly remind readers of Mr. Conrad*s novels, no ordinary interpreter. Thus, engrossing though the story is, it is Marlow's telling of it, and the self-revelation involved in the telling, which constitute the paramount attrac tion of the book. ... Whatever the subject, ... Marlow, whom we take to be Conrad's alter ego, is always penetrating and always profound. ° The Saturday Beview called Conrad's method in Chance "at first a little bewildering," but quickly added: I He knows what he is doing, even though the reader, especially in the early stages of the story, may not realize it. His way | is a direct challenge to the reader’s casual attention. He ! will not be skipped. The cumulative effect is extremely vivid, I and readers are rewarded for some trialsAof patience by the ' realization of a fine story finely told. ° . The Outlook and the Literary Digest also wrote favorably of this feature of Conrad's work in Chance. "Apart from Mr. Conrad's preter- j ; natural solemnity in creating and analyzing characters, his workman- I I j |ship is of the finest," said the Outlook. "If the reader's attention ' ' / j is slow to arouse, once fairly engaged, it becomes increasingly 90 intense to the end." The Literary Digest stated: "The author uses | the zigzag method. From the comments, first of one and then of j | another, we learn to pity the young girl, whose father was imprisoned I |for irregularities in finance. . . . There is no use questioning or ■ i i 1 91 l criticizing Conrad's method." 88CXII (January 17, 191*0, 102. 89CXVII (January 2k, 191k), 117. 9°CVII (May 2, 191*0, *^5. 91XLVIII (May 9, 191*0, 1H9. 236 Several critics of Victory, noticing how much more direct the narration was than that of Chance. wrote favorably of it. "There is more of action in Victory than in most of Conrad's books; the style is more direct, although the weaving back and forth of the plot is ever present," wrote Grace Isabel Colbron. "But the fascination that holds the lover of Conrad's work spellbound throughout the pages is. 92 here also." In his review of Victory Curie also praised the story as one which called for "special attention ... as not only a new I experiment but a new experiment of an astonishing kind." "Chance is ! indirect, Victory is direct," he said. "And -unlike the directness j I j of such earlier works as An Outcast of the Islands and The Secret ’ Agent. the whole attitude of Victory is that of an austere simplicity of execution." The directness of Victory, he felt, was the result of 1 i Conrad's recognition "that method and story were absolutely connect- j I fiO 1 ; ed." The Nation admitted that Conrad's was "an art" which did "not j ; lend itself to easy analysis," but described its effectiveness as | follows: ! Not the least amazing detail is the unity of impression | produced in spite of the mass of preliminary detail. Perhaps j it is to gain this result that he always begins a tale in the ; middle and writes backward and forward to the end and the ; : Among men who had followed the progress of Conrad's literary 1 career from its beginnings, Arnold Bennett and Henry James both ! ^Atlantic Monthly. XLI (May, 1915), 323. ^Fortnightly Beview,CIV (October, 1915), 676. 9b C (April 15, 1915), bl6. beginning. In that way the thrust is applied at the centre with consequent gain in effectiveness.-^*- showed their interest in the narration in Chance. Bennett wrote in his Journal on January 18, 191^: Conrad’s Chance came yesterday. Bead 150 pp. This is a dis couraging hook for a writer to read, because he damn well knows he can’t write as well as this. This episode of the arrival of the news of De Barrel's bankruptcy at his house in Hove where his daughter and her superb friend of a governess are living is simply sublime. I know nothing better than this, and precious little as good. Later, after he had read the entire book, Bennett wrote that the novel was "very fine," especially the chapters "’The Governess’ and the last one." Although he believed "the tea party chapter and *0n the Pavement*" were "too long," he said, "the indirect narrative is 1 I 1 ■successfully managed on the whole, even to fourth-hand narrative, but j |here and there the recounted dialogue and gesture is so minute as to j [ 95 ibe ■unconvincing." | I 1 j Henry James showed his interest in the narrative method of Chance j by devoting several pages of his Notes on Novelists to it. After a I j number of readings of James ’s appraisal, although one remains unsure I of whether or not he actually approved of the method, he is certain i ' ; !tha,t James recognized in it a tour de force. James declared that the | narration placed "Mr. Conrad absolutely alone as a votary of the way ;to do a thing that shall make it undergo the most doing" and that "the , [whole undertaking was committed by its very first step either to be I |’art' exclusively or to be nothing." Of Conrad’s care for making his 1 .work "art" James said, "This is the prodigious rarity, since surely ' 1 we have known for many a day no other such case of the whole clutch of i I 1 -^The Journal of Arnold Bennett (New York: The Literary Guild, 1933), P.>97. ........ .................................. eggs and these of the freshest, in that one basket.1 ' These lines seem to contain doubt that the method was successful: The omniscience ... which sets Marlow's omniscience in motion ... invites consideration of itself only in a degree less than that in which Marlow's own invites it; and Marlow's own is a pro longed hovering flight of the subjective over the outstretched ground of the exposed. We make out this ground but through the shadow cast by the flight, clarify it though the real author visibly reminds himself again and again that he must— all the . more that, as if by some tremendous forecast of future applied science, the upper aeroplane causes another, as we have said, to depend from it and that one still another; these dropping shadow after shadow, to the no small menace of intrinsic colour and form and whatever, upon the passive expanse. What shall we most call Mr. Conrad's method accordingly but his attempt to clarify quand mtme— ridden as he has been, we perceive at the ad cf fifty pages of "Chance," by such a danger of steeping his matter in perfect eventual obscuration as we recall no other artist's consenting to with an equal grace. Conrad's real achievement, James believed, was that he effected "a fusion . . . not between our author's idea and his machinery, but between the different parts of his genius itself." Therefore, said James, we have as the force that fills the cup just the high-water mark of a beautiful and generous mind at play in conditions comparatively thankless— thoroughly, unweariedly yet at the j same time ever so elegantly at play, and doing more for l itself than it succeeds in getting done for it.96 James, more than any other writer of his day, was impressed by !the number of readers, or buyers, of Chance. Conrad's very method, i felt James, was a prodigy, and he declared that ; nothing could be of a greater reward to critical curiosity ' were it not still for the wonder of wonders, a new page in ^Notes on Novelists, with Some Other Notes (New York: Charles Scr ibner' s Sons, 191^) > PP • 3*+ 5“ 3 51 • ........ “ ' ' 239 the record altogether— the fact that these things are apparently what the common reader has seen and understood. Great then would seem to he after all the common readerJ97 Several other critics of this period accorded more definite praise to Conrad’s narrative method. H. W. Boynton wrote in his appreciation of Conrad’s work that Chance was decidedly the best of the Conrad stories” which were "not exclusively stories of the sea." Of Marlow he said, "He winds into his subject with all his old subtlety and exhaustiveness, his gruff pretences of cynicism and 98 underlying passion of sympathy.” In commenting upon the same novel, Huneker said: His latest novel, Chance, is a specific instance of his intricate and elliptical method. Several personages of the J story relate in almost fugal manner, the heroine appearing to us as if reflected by some revolving mirror. It is a ! difficult and elusive method, but it presents us with many facets of character and is swift and secular.99 Symons said (also of Chance): ! Conrad’s stories have no plots, and they do not need them, j They are a series of studies in temperaments, deduced from I slight incidents; studies in emotion, with hardly a rag to j hold together the one or two scraps of action, out of which ! they are woven. . . . Conrad conceals his astonishing inven- 1 tion under many disguises. What has seemed to some to be I untidy in construction will be found to be a mere matter of I subtlety, a skilful arresting of attention a diverting of | it by a new interest thrust in sideways. ; Cohrad had not been aware, while writing Hostromo during the long : | ( i months of 1903, that he deserted memory as the source and the sea as j the setting of his fiction, and that it would be eight years or more 97 James, p. 351* 98Wation, XCVIII (April 9, 191*0. "worth American Review, CC (August, 1914), 2jb. 100Forum, LIII (May, 1915), 590. his " 240~ before he would again return to both the source and the setting of his early work. He may, however, have been more or less consciously aware of his use of more familiar materials when he began the first story of 1Twixt Land and Sea. On May 17, 1910,when he had just 1 finished Under Western Eyes, he wrote a letter to Galsworthy which showed his relief that he had at last completed the novel with the unfamiliar setting and had begun to write "A Smile of Fortune," a 101 story that was "to be comical in a nautical setting." Later, in J 1919, when he wrote his preface for 1Twixt Land and Sea, he remem- • bered his difficulty and referred bitterly to Under Western Eyes as I t "associated with the memory of a severe illness which seemed to wait j like a tiger in the jungle on the turn of a path to jump on me the moment the last words of that novel were written." Only after he became well, he then said, was he able to direct his "tottering steps toward the Indian Ocean" and effect "a complete change of surroundings 1 and atmosphere from the Lake of Geneva." All of the stories of * Twixt i Land and Sea, although "not the record of personal experience," were based, he said "on the character, the vision and sentiment of the 102 first twenty years" of his "independent life." The strength of the belief that Conrad was at his best as a : writer of sea fiction was demonstrated by the enthusiasm with which i critics of 'Twixt Land and Sea hailed his return, as a writer, to the I sea. "Even his staunchest admirers felt a half-acknowledged » 101 Life and Letters. II, 107-108. 102 Preface to 'Twixt Land and Sea, Complete works, XIX (New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 192k), vii-ix. 2hl disappointment in some of his later volumes, "because nihilism and dynamite seem so incongruous to this veteran man of the sea,” wrote the Bookman. "That is why this new volume, containing three new tales of exotic lands and waters, with the old-time flavour of the unfathom able mystery of nature and of the human heart, bring with them a thrill 103 of the old enthusiasm." The Independent stated: With the name of Joseph Conrad one almost invariably associates the sea tale which is above all deliberate in matter and manner .... All who have enjoyed his other tales of hot blood and tropic seas will.enjoy this book, done with the author’s I measured touch.^ 4 | i The American Monthly Beview of Beviews said, "Mr. Conrad's ... ! I ’Twixt Land and Sea tales are in his best, most characteristic j 105 vein." The Saturday Beview declared, "Wo title could better 1 present what one desires from Mr. Conrad. With the sea alone for j ' i j his theme he has shown a mastery which places him above all contem- porary comparison.The Outlook said: ! / Mr. Conrad is here seen at his very best. . . . His love and feeling for the sea in all its moods, for tropic atmosphere, and for the dramatic possibilities of distant land, alissome | from many years of adventure as sailor and shipmaster. | Further evidence of the belief that Conrad was at his best in writing of the sea was contained in comments in reviews of Chance and i 1 Victory. "It is some time since we have had from Mr. Conrad a story 1 I 1 103 „ I XXXVII (March, 1913), 85. ; 10l*LXXXrv (March 6, 1913), 538. 105 XLVII (June, 1913), 762. 106 CXIV (October 19, 1912), k-92. ; 107 • CIII (March 15,_ 19131, 596_.__ __ ___________ ' of the sea,— the work in which he excels," said the Literary Digest in commenting upon Chance. "His new novel gives us, at least, as much ,108 sea as land, and we are thankful for that much. The Athenaeum said that the story in Chance improved when Conrad took it to sea, 109 because "on land he seemed rather less at home" The Spectator exclaimed, "Sailormen all the world over must thank Mr. Conrad for adding to his wonderful gallery two such splendid portraits of heroic unselfishness as Captain Anthony and Mr. Charles Powell of 110 the ’Ferndale.*” And in commenting upon Victory.the American Monthly Eeview of Beviews stated, "Joseph Conrad’s marvelous gift for r writing enthralling romance and profound and magnificent philosophy inextricably tangled with the mystery and freedom of the sea, is revealed at its best in his latest novel, ’Victory.’"1" * " * ’ ( Articles and books of this period also indicated a revival of I interest in Conrad as a writer about the sea. Evidence of this ! interest was shown in an article in the Bookman, April, 1915, titled "Conrad’s First Ship," which gave interesting details about Conrad’s experiences at sea and included a sketch of the Otago, the first ship ; Conrad commanded, as well as a map showing his voyages at sea. The I map was later that year included in the American edition of Victory. i ! j I Among leading critics of this period there was also evidence that ! j ' i i I 108XLVIII (May 9, 191*0, 1119. j (January 17, 191**-), pt. 1, p. 88. ; 110 CXII (January 17, 191*+), 102. 11:LLI (June, 1915), 761. 2k3 Conrad was primarily regarded as a writer of sea fiction. H. W. Boynton, in his article on Conrad for the Nation, showed his prefer ence for the work of the first period when he made references to most of Conrad’s individual hooks but did not mention two of the important ones of the period from 190k to mid-1912— The Secret Agent and Under 112 Western Byes. Huneker, as already mentioned, thought the fact that Conrad was a "psychologist of the sea" to be Conrad's "chief claim to originality." Probably also significant in this regard is j his statement about Youth: "This volume alone will place Conrad among j 113 ■ the immortals." Without actually committing themselves to a favoritism for Conrad’s writings about the sea, both Curie and Follett also showed their high regard for the early work. "The sea is, ! ! I indeed, a strong agency in moulding the characters of many of Conrad’s ; jmen. For its vigour enters into all his books," said Curie. "The | finest and the most typical men in Conrad’s stories are seamen. There j are exceptions, of course, but the exceptions belong to a different I U k jbreed." Follett admired Conrad’s sea fiction because it showed "a ■ tinge of pride of craft, the fine proprietary esteem of a . certain tradition, in Mr. Conrad’s appreciation of the social honour upon 115 : which rests the freemasonry of sailors." f • ! The unfavorable reception of some of Conrad’s writings of this I 112 XCVIII (April 9, 191*0* 395-397. 113 North American Eeview, CC (August, 19lk), 2J0 and 275. ' Ilk Curie, p. 117. 115Follett, p. bj. 244 period by some of the literary men who had followed Conrad*s career from its inception seems to indicate their belief that Conrad was a writer of sea fiction who had written his great work before 1904. Galsworthy, for example, wrote in his reminiscences of Conrad some X3.6 years later that "Chance, in 1914," was "indifferent Conrad." After reading Victory in 1915, be wrote Garnett, "Conrad*s Victory is something of a triumph for his hypnotic faculty, for it's not really 117 good." Garnett, like Galsworthy, had reservations about Chance, which he did not express to Conrad. Twelve years after Conrad's death, however, he said that the novel did not have "ease, certainty and inevitability in its artistic effect as a whole," even though it did possess "rare qualities, and many brilliant scenes, dramatic developments and great technical ingenuity." Huneker also felt i i ! that Chance did not represent Conrad's best work. "I admire a j different Conrad from 'Chance,’" he wrote his friend Bupert Brooke in ' , 119 1914. Galsworthy left no doubt about his own preference for the work of Conrad's early years, when he wrote to Garnett a few years later: i I suppose really Conrad is to me the Conrad of the Youth volume, Lord Jim. The Nigger. the Typhoon volume, and The 1 - j ^ Castles in Spain, and Other Screeds (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1927), p. 109* 117 I Letters from John Galsworthy, ed. Edward Garnett (London: ' Jonathan Cape, 193^+) , P« 22. 118 I ! "Introductory Essay," in Conrad's Prefaces to His Works (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, 1937), P* 34* j 119 I Intimate Letters of James Gibbons Huneker, ed. Josephine Huneker (Hew York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 1936), p. l8l. 1 ' ...................... “ " " 2^5 Secret Agent; and I can*t put up, like the younger generation, with these later books. But look here my dear fellow, what I say to you about Conrad mustn’t be passed on, for I wouldn't do harm to him for the world .1^ Wells also revised his opinion of Conrad's work in later years, and his final opinion indicated that he too preferred Conrad's early work. "I find very much of Conrad oppressive, as overwrought as an Indian tracery," he said, "and it is only in chosen passages and some of his short stories that I would put his work on a level with the naked 121 vigour of Stephen Crane." Gosse, too, expressed a preference for Conrad's early work. "You will see that we have lost Conrad— a beautiful figure," he wrote to Andre Gide after Conrad's death. "But he had said all he had to say, and went on writing in order to make 122 money. He will live in a half dozen of his early books." Even though some of Conrad's work of the years from 1912 until j mid-1915 was not to the liking of all of his noted contemporaries— 1 indeed, he may never have observed the gradual change in attitude in such men as Wells, Galsworthy, and Gosse— Conrad probably paid a great j amount of attention during this period to the increasing interest in | his work shown by some of the leading American critics. The very ! I enthusiastic appreciation by H. W. Boynton, which appeared in the Nation in April, 191^, has already been cited (see above, p. 215). 1 I Boynton's article was followed within five weeks by an article written t I I 120 * Letters from John Galsworthy, p. 236. ^ ^Experiments in Autobiography (New York: The Macmillan ’ Company, 193^), p. 531* ' ; 122 Evan Charteris, The Life and Letters of Sir Edmund Gosse (New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1931)> P• ^77• 2461 by Mary Austin, and within four months by another written by Joseph Huneker. Mary Austin*s article contained an interesting account of her visit with Conrad at his home several years earlier, a visit she had arranged after there had been "an exchange of letters" and later "an exchange of books" between them. During the interview Conrad had called her early appreciations of him "the first voice out of America," and had said, "I stand on the shore and make my shout, but nothing has come out of the dark." Miss Austin’s description of Conrad at the time of her interview, which follows, set the tone for j her article: > I * Here was a man who convinced you at the moment of contact that j sickness and death itself are trumpery devices to be employed against the human spark. ... He was one to whom Life had chosen to reveal herself in that /the romantic7 guise. To J begin with, there was the figure of the man himself, the thin frame, the long face with its dark burning eyes, the preter- j naturally long hands, white and nervous, plucking at his beard. | Behind him there was the dramatic heritage of exile, his ! unpronounceable Polish name, his strange calling to the sea ' and his youthful passion for the English tongue. Of his work she wrote: It would be strange if this lonely soul, working in his somewhat restricted medium of sea-faring life, had stumbled | on the solution that our sociological novelists groped for in : vain. ... It is not the superiority of his moral scheme, but Conrad's superior artistry, which enables him to discard all ! modern extenuation and deal with character as simply as the 1 Greeks did, as a struggle between man and the Gods.^3 i < Huneker*s association with Conrad was one which began about 1912 , } and continued throughout the rest of Conrad’s life. Huneker*s progress, i in securing Conrad's friendship was extremely rapid. His letters show 123 "A Sermon in One Man," Harper's Weekly, (May 16, 1914), pt. 2, p . 20. that on September 29, 1912, he was arranging to interview Conrad for Harper*s, that on November 17, 1912, he had interviewed him, and that on December 12, 1912, he was telling his friend, W. C. Brownell, "Joseph Conrad and Symons wish us to live out in Kent— Wells also 12h (they are all hard by)." Within a few more months, he wrote a friend, "Wells is a decent chap, so is Chesterton. . .. John Garvin, editor of the Pall Mall is strong man here, but take it by and large, 125 Joseph Conrad is the most lovable of the lot." After finishing his article on Conrad in 1913, he wrote John Quinn (who some time later was to buy most of Conrad's manuscripts), "The * Joseph Conrad * is finished. ... What a job— yet written from the heart. I love ; the man, I love the great artist. . . .I ’m not pleased with the ; result." A few days after this he wrote Edward C. Marsh, an 1 ! American journalist, author, and editor, "At last I’ve finished the | 127 ‘ ’Conrad.* What pleasure to reread him!" I Huneker's article has already been cited extensively, but one I important feature of it still remains to be treated. Like Curie in England during the same year and Follett in the United States one year later, he made a particular effort to publicize the work that ■ had been somewhat adversely criticized before 1912. He stated in his ■ 1 ^ article that the last novel of that period,Under Western Eyes (1911), 12k Letters of James Gibbons Huneker York: Charles Scribner’s Sons), pp. lho, 125 Letters of Huneker, p. 156. 126 Letters of Huneker, p. I67. 127 Letters of Huneker, p. 172. was his favorite. Of it he wrote: Under Western Byes is a masterpiece of irony, observation, and pity. I once described it as being as powerful as Dostoievsky and as well written as Turgenieff. The truth is it is Conrad at his best, although I know that I may give offense in seeming to slight the Eastern tales. It has the color and shape and gait of the marvelous stories of Dostoievsky and Turgenieff— with an absolutely original motive, and more modern. A magical canvas I It is likely that the efforts of writers like Boynton, Austin, and Huneker to bring Conrad's writings to the attention of American readers during this period were helpful In getting his work better understood and more widely read, but It was due largely to Conrad's i own efforts that his books were finally widely printed in this country.; On July 20, 1913, he wrote a letter to Alfred A. Khopf, then a member j j of the firm of Doubleday, Page and Company (Conrad *s American | publisher), in which he strongly defended the marketability of his own work and in which he complained of the lack of interest of that J firm in his writings. After saying, ”1 find it quite exciting to be rediscovered by ngr own publisher, after such a long time,” lie expressed pleasure in the fact that the American publisher had bought two of his previously published books from another American publisher. "It ' is a sign of interest. But the fact remains that Mr. Doubleday might have had all my books up to date in his hands if he had cared," he j said. i Other people bought them and I haven’t heard that they have i been ruined by it; though I did not give away my work for ten I cents a volume, I can assure you. I am not an amateur who ! plays at it. It's anything but play with me I can assure you. ; 1 Pfi North American Review, CC (August, 191*0, 27*1- " 249 ! In the same long letter Conrad suggested definite projects for the future, such as the publication by Doubleday of Curie*s apprecia tion of him, the purchase from Harpers of A Personal Record so that it i might be re-issued as publicity to American readers, and other such projects. The practical nature of Conrad’s suggestions makes it clear that he was no longer the author who had eighteen years earlier spoken uncertainly to Garnett of his first look into a publishing house as comparable to a "peep into a brigand's cave." One line in tbs letter made clear to Knopf how earnest Conrad was in wanting to have ; real help from his American publisher. "The question for me is: Has j the Boubleday, Page Co. simply bought two books of mine," said Conrad, ( • 129 j"or is it to be a connection?" ! Conrad seems to have made his point, for during the next two j years several of the earlier Conrad volumes were bought and re-issued I I by Doubleday, and a uniform edition to be published in this country became a recognized project for the future. As early as August, 1913, j one American magazine writer told his readers that "new editions of I Youth and The Point of Honour" had "Just been published" and that "a j courageous publisher would have no cause to regret the launching of a uniform edition of Conrad's works.”130 Although it is not certain that these republications were made by Doubleday, Page and Company, it i is certain that during the year following Conrad’s letter several of ; , the early books were purchased by that firm. In her letter to me ^ i 129Life and Letters. II, 146-148. 13°Bookman, XXXVII (August, 1913), 594. 250 1 about An Outcast of the Islands. Miss Helen Cohan, of Appleton, Century, and Crofts, said, "In 191^ Appleton sold all right in An Outcast of the Islands to Doubleday, Page and Company." By July, 191^, The Nigger of the Narcissus was republished (for the first time in the United States with that title) with the preface included for the first time since its original appearance in serial form. In his review of the book George Middleton wrote in Boolean: With the commendable desire of bringing out a uniform edition of Conrad his publishers have now purchased the old plates of The Children of the Sea and have brought that novel out under its original title, The Nigger of the Narcissus. What is of especial interest, however, to the admirers of this foremost novelist, is i a foreword recently written by the author as well as a suppressed preface which did not appear when the book was published, but which was appended to the serialization in the Hew Be view. Both are revealatory /sic/ of the man* s art as well as his peculiar regard for this early novel.-*-31 During the next year A Set of Six (published by Doubleday Page, and Company) made its first appearance in the United States. Interest . 1 ! in the book was not unlike that of the previous year in The Nigger of the Narcissus. "If *A Set of Six’ is not likely to add materially to iMr. Conrad's fame in America among those already familiar with his ! work, his admirers will be glad to get it in an edition uniform with his other works," wrote the New York Times, "and if it falls into the ‘hands of any who as yet know not the author, they will almost certainly ! ;be led to adventure as far, say, as Nostromo, after which they are | 132 lost— bound Conradians for life." J The Nation said, "Since these I ■ — ,tales were first printed, Conrad's fame has greatly spread. It has i 131xxxrx (July, 191*0, 563. ~^2Supplement (January 31, 1915), P» 38• : approached the stage where not only a great many people have read some of his work, but a large number who have not read it are feeling that they must." Conrad's re-definition of his relationship with his American publisher is important not only for the interest the republished or newly published books stirred up among American reviewers, it is important also because the interest thus evidenced probably caused ♦ that publisher to have greater confidence in Conrad's books as profitable from a bookseller's point of view. At any rate, the re issue of The Nigger of the Narcissus was followed during the next few years by re-issue of other Conrad books, and although it is now i impossible to cite particular titles, during 1915 the log-jam in the United States was so completely broken that thereafter publication of Conrad's books, whether for the first or a later time, became a ! profitable venture for both Conrad and his publisher. During these years, when Conrad's books were being published and publicized with hitherto unheard-of vigor, an interesting comment was made on Chance. "It has just occurred to his publishers to advertise ! his new novel inside a halo of questions showing what the elect think 1 of him," said the Atlantic Monthly. "The result is so satisfactory i ! from the countingroom standpoint, that one wonders they didn't think : 13^ ' of it long ago." The nature of Conrad's final acceptance by a large public is, of course, not entirely clear, but a positive factor 133C (February 18, 1915), 199. I ’? ! } . CCIV (October, 191*0, 530. 252 | I in his acceptance was probably the unusually persistent efforts of his admirers to have his work more widely appreciated, or more thoroughly understood, or both. The final efforts of his admirers to secure for Conrad’s books both a good sale and a thorough understanding covered a broad gamut. At the one end of it were the efforts of a long-time admirer like Sir Hugh Clifford, who did much to facilitate the publication of Chance in the New York Herald. "After all, 'Chance* was the first book that really made a popular stir," Mrs. Conrad wrote later, "and a great j i part of this wide success was due to Sir Hugh Clifford*s friendly j 135 ! interest.” Somewhere near the other end of the gamut were the j efforts of Ford Madox Hueffer, another admirer of Conrad from the I jearliest days of his literary career, to convince Englishmen that 1 1 iConrad understood them as few writers had, and was eventually bound ; i ■ 1 ! to succeed with them because of the cumulative effect of his writings i 4 jin demonstrating this. "Mr. Conrad has gradually so soaked himself in I jthe English point of view," he declared, "that he has, in the. end, ! given to Anglo-Saxondom the most attractive, the most pleasant, the ■ j 136 1 most desirable of all views of . . . /elipsis Hueffer*s/ itself, i But Conrad’s greatest assistance during this period came from I I I new critics who had either not commented on his work in the past or 1 had discovered his writings fairly late in his career. Notable ^ ^Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him (New York: Doubleday, Page and : Company, 192o), p. l4l. ^ ^Thus to Revisit: Memories and Impressions (London: Chapman and Hall) p. 93* ........." ' ’ ~ 2531 service was performed by Sir Sidney Colvin, who wrote of Chance: Criticism has long ago, but popular favour hardly yet, fully recognized the extraordinary power and value of the work in tale, romance and reminiscence which Mr. Conrad has been con tributing to our literature in the last eighteen years; work which sets before us the fruits of a remarkable experience enriched a hundred-fold in the ripening light and heat of the imagination; work combining, as scarcely any other in our time combines, the threefold powers of enthralling narrative, magically vital description and unflagging subtlety and sanity of analytic character study; work finally distinguished by so resourceful a mastery of English speech and style that we very rarely find ourselves thinking, whether to admire or condone, of the fact that the writer is not English born.137 i Further service to Conrad during these years resulted from the | ! publication of two books by new critics of his work, fittingly, an | i j Englishman, Bichard Curie, and an American, Wilson Follett. Although j I ' ! the differences in approach and plan of the books makes them difficult to compare, they had the common aim of making Conrad tinder stood and, |consequently, certain points of similarity which are important to | this study. Curie's book, Joseph Conrad: A Study, which was published 1 in 191*+, was an analytical treatment of the separate phases of Conrad's I jwork. Follett*s book, Joseph Conrad: A Short Study of His Intellectual t ’and Emotional Attitude toward His Work and of the Chief Characteristics i • of His Novels, which was published in 1915, was a grand attempt to find I the key to Conrad's work— the whole of it. By the student of Conrad of I 1 those years the two studies must properly have been regarded as i supplementing each other and, because such detailed criticism of j . Conrad1 s work was still fairly new, must have resulted in an even fuller understanding of his work. 1 ^Observer (May, 1915), p. 135* 254 The writers of both hooks, which have already been extensively cited in this chapter, were alike in objecting that Conrad was not accepted by his readers in terms of his own aims. ’ ’ There is a kind of Conrad 'tradition* in the air— a thing as deadly to a man as a spider’s web to a fly. . . . The critics have begun to expect from him work of a certain kind," Curie wrote. "The truth of the matter is that Conrad, as a phenomenon, is as yet little realized. ... It appears to me that he is positively misunderstood by many of the people who admire him most." Follett began his study by stating: There has grown a gap between what Mr. Conrad offers himself as being and what he is commonly received for, so that the incurred quarrel of the critic is more with the terms of his acceptance than with any proposed rejection.139 Besides such similar starting points, the two books had other common features, important among them that of inviting greater attention to Conrad's writings of the years from 1904 until mid-1912. Curie stated emphatically that he wrote his book in part "to arouse interest in the greatest and least known of Mr. Conrad's novels, in Uostromo is Conrad's longest novel, and in my opinion, it is by far his greatest. It is a book singularly little known and one which many people find a difficulty in reading (probably owing to the confused way in which time is indicated), but it is one of the most astounding tours de force in all literature. For sheer creative genius it overtops all Conrad's work. Its manner of narration is, perhaps, involved, but its intricacy is highly artistic, and the continuity of the whole is convincing. In dramatic vigour, in psychological subtlety, and in the sustained the marvellous Hostromo." l4o of which he said: 13^Curle, pp. 3-4 139Follett, p. 4. "Preface," p. vii 255 feeling of a mood (an atmosphere at once physical and mental) Nostromo is a . phenomenal masterpiece. It is Conrad*s genius incarnate. After thus praising Nostromo, Curie directed his attention to the two other novels of the period from 190*4- until mid-1912, The Secret Agent and Under Western Eyes. The first of the two. he called "a great hook*' which suffered "to some extent from the improbability of its plot." He then said, "But though the main idea of The Secret Agent is far fetched, . . . its atmosphere and its characters are in his finest 1*4-2 ! manner. ... The whole tone of the book is strangely authentic." ; j Of Under Western Eyes he wrote: The book is written with great precision and subtlety of language and marks a step in Conrad’s exactitude of style. j Personally I do not put Under Western Eyes on so lofty a pinnacle as, say, The Secret Agent (there is a certain bleakness about it), ; but I think it is a surer piece of art. ^3 i Although Follett did not agree with Curie that The Secret Agent j i |was superior to Under Western Eyes, which he called "incomparably i igreater" than the other novel, he praised both books. "The Secret ! 'Agent is an intellectual extravaganza, and as such a delight," he said; I ! "but its irony is of treatment alone— a flimsy pretence by contrast j i i 1 with Under Western Eyes, where the irony is of fate itself working ' «lkh ■ through the soul of a people. 1 ' Besides praising as important work the novels of the years from 190*4- to mid-1912, both Curie and Follett suggested that Conrad's I 1*4-1 1 Curie, p. * < • . ■^^Curle, p. *4-3. ^^Curle, pp. * t - * 4 —*4-5. 1 •^•^Follett, "Preface," p. viii. 256 career as a writer had been characterized by growth. "Admirers of his earlier work may consider it almost arid," Curie wrote, "but that is simply to misunderstand the recent developments of Conrad's Conrad's entire evolution thus far has been a history of shifting attitudes, revised methods, amplitudes won but to be impatiently discarded— a spectacle, in short, of the liveliest originality at play over the whole rich inter penetration of outward act and inward thought, of the will run over into the deed, which makes up the one possible subject— infinite life itself.^® Curie also defended Conrad at length against the charge that he did not understand women. In his chapter entitled "Conrad's Women," [ To say, as it is sometimes said, that Conrad does not under stand women is an observation revealing blindness. For, indeed, his women portraits are the most finished, delicate, and poignant of all his portraits. But the reason for its being arises, probably, from the fact that Conrad does not make love the central theme of all his stories and from the fact that his finest women are good women. They are of the charming and ‘ " ” ' ~ ~ rather than of the ardent and Following his general defense of Conrad's characterization of women, | Curie mentioned several of the women of his books, whose characteri- i , zations he praised. Especially fine, he believed, were those of Mrs. Gould and Winnie Verloc, both women created in novels of the years from 190*1- until mid-1912. Curie also defended Conrad against ! the secondary charge that his women were not feminine enough. "His art." .1^5 Follett said more generally: he declared: •^Curle, p. 47. ^^Follett, pp. 6-7. ^^Curle, p. 1*1-5• 257 finest women, it is true, are women of character and resolve, hut they have the feminine temperament," he maintained. "Not only is there not antagonism between the two, but they are in accord with Although Follett had little to say about the women of the early books, he expressed great admiration for Conrad's characterization of Lena in Victory. Of her own personal victory he said: It is embodied, first, in that ghastly scene where, submitting herself momentarily to the nauseous endearments of Ricardo, she tricks him into giving up the knife which may prove Heyst*s salvation, capturing so 'the very sting of death in the service of love.' On a higher plane, her victory is over herself: over some half-acknowledged thing in herself that has been oppressed by the sense of living in an unholy love, and that has cried out silently for expiation. On the highest personal plane of all, t of her woman's simplicity over Heyst's On still another point— the point that both in telling his story require the leisurely length of narrative process that goes more with the ideal of getting in all that belongs to the identity of the i subject than with keeping out everything that does not belong," said Both in the short story and in the novel he represents the extreme of reaction against technique as an arbitrary ideal of brevity and compression, as a set of laws imposed upon I the subject from without, toward technique as an agent of the , subject--truth and personality being, in his view, part of the subject. one another. ... And Conrad's women do not trade on their sex— lk8 their femininity is unconscious.1 1 and in depicting his characters Conrad was inclined to be overly detailed, Follett alone defended Conrad. "His species of unity I Follett. 258 | Only at the end of Conrad's stories could the reader see the reason for some of Conrad's amplitudes, Follett believed. "The reason," he said, "is in its shortest version, that the effectiveness of a denouement resting exclusively on character is intensified in propor tion to one's intimacy with the character." He did not feel, however that the method was entirely free from danger, hut rather that successful application of method was worth the risk or, as he said, "One may see at first only the amplification, the preposterous 150 generosity, and miss the adaptation, which is art. There is always a risk in simplification, and one who studies f Conrad's career as a writer from its beginnings to the time of his I acceptance on terms of his own choosing must be always aware of this > risk. Even so, it does seem that the key to understanding Conrad's i reception as a fiction writer can be obtained by a careful reading of the preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus (which appeared in 1897 as I I an afterword to the novel then serialized in the New Review) and the | preface to Chance (which in 1914 brought him both the wide popularity ] and the full understanding he had long hoped for). Of certain comfort : I ' to the student of Conrad and very likely to Conrad himself was the fact that the suppressed preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus was j 1 for the first time published as a preface to that work in the same year that Chance appeared. Follett, more than any critic of the years between 1895 and 1915 > realized the importance of the early preface in explaining Conrad's works. 150Follett, pp. 92-96. “ '259! In speaking of the novelist, Conrad wrote in 1897: He speaks to . . . our sense of pity . . . and to the subtle but invincible conviction of solidarity that knits together the loneliness of innumerable hearts to the solidarity in dreams, in Joy, in sorrow, in aspirations, in illusions, in hope, in fear, which binds men to each other, which binds together all humanity— the dead to the living and the living to unborn. He further wrote that, if "the worker in prose" was "deserving and j fortunate," he might "perchance attain to such clearness of sincerity that at last the presented vision of regret or pity, or terror or mirth," would awaken in the hearts of the beholders that feeling of unavoidable solidarity; of the solidarity in mysterious origin, in toil, in joy, in hope, in uncertain fate, which binds men to each other and all mankind to the visible world. 5 ^ The important place given nature in Conrad’s early books caused i j I some critics to fail to examine his work in terms of the aim he had expressed in the lines above— the aim of exalting man and making his struggles meaningful. Galsworthy did much to minimize the place of man in Conrad’s universe, when he wrote in 1908: The Universe is always saying: The little part called man I is smaller than the wholeI Man cannot grasp that statement, j He ducks his head resentfully beneath his wing, and hides from , ( contemplation of this truth. It is he who thus creates the j irony of things. In the novels of Balzac and Charles Dickens there is the feeling of environment, of the growth of men from men. In the novels of Turgenev the characters are bathed in light; Nature with her many moods is all around, but man is first. In the novels of Joseph Conrad, Nature is first, man second. The certainty of this is not obtruded on the reader, it reaches him in subtle ways; it does not seem conveyed by conscious effort, ' ^ ' ' ' ^ ‘ Preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus (New York: Doubleday, Page and Company, 19l4), pp. viii-xi. 260 but through a sort of temperamental distillation. And it is this feeling for, and prepossession with, the manifestations of mysterious forces that gives this writer his unique position among novelists.152 Later critics objected to Galsworthy's opinion, and it was probably the statements of writers like Frederic Taber Cooper and i Edwin Bjorkman in 1912 and H. W. Boynton in 191^- which prepared the way for an opinion more in agreement with Conrad's expressed aim. "Itj is almost incredible that anyone could read "the novels of Joseph Conrad without feeling, above all else, their vital and tremendous i human interest," wrote Cooper. "Everywhere is man; man measuring i I his puny strength against the universe, and foredoomed to defeat; yet ' 153 in his defeat remaining always the focal point of interest." After i I i re-stating Galsworthy's belief that man was second to nature in ! | Conrad's novels, Bjorkman said, "That is not true. In every one of I his stories man might be said to constitute 'the main show.' Nature is present in abundance, but only as seen and heard and felt by man," i j he said. "Conrad himself has declared that 'it is we alone who, I | swayed by the audacity of our minds and the tremors of our hearts, are I 15k s j the sole artisans of all the wonder and romance of the world.'" [ I H. W. Boynton, after also quoting Galsworthy, declared that the power I of Conrad's stories (as Cooper had said) lay in their "vital and tremendous human interest." "It is the hapless struggle of man with Joseph Conrad: A, Disquisition," Fortnightly Review, N. S., LXXXIII (April, 1908), 627-630. 153 "Joseph Conrad," Bookman, XXXV (March, 1912), 62. 15k "Joseph Conrad: Master of Literary Color,” American Monthly Review of Reviews, XLV (May, 1912), 559. 261 the universe which lifts Conrad’s imagination— lifts it clear of the mere unpleasantness of pathos, fairly to the plane of tragedy," he 155 saxd. i | The importance of the people in Conrad’s novels was also | I recognized, before mid-1912, by both Perceval Gibbon and Stephen Reynolds, both of whom anticipated the later work of Follett in their efforts to apply the words of Conrad's literary creed to his practice. Gibbon took his text from a statement Conrad had made in the then I j recently published Some Reminiscences— an imaginative and exact rendering of authentic memories may i j serve worthily that spirit of piety towards all things human 1 ' which sanctions the conceptions of a writer of tales, and the S emotions of a man reviewing his own experiences— j and declared that Nostromo, Kurtz, Falk, "and very many others" were i i , j "the material upon which" Conrad exercised "'that spirit of piety j | towards all things human'" which was "part of his literary creed." ! ! Gibbon wrote, Here, I believe, we have the key to Mr. Conrad’s method; imagination, the faculty of whole vision that sees men and women, not as detached and arbitrary figures, but as the product of circumstances, environment, heredity, and in , relationship to their work and their n e i g h b o r s : ' Reynolds caught from Conrad the meaning of the last lines of The I I Nigger of the Narcissus, "haven't we, together and upon the immortal sea, wrung out a meaning from our sinful lives? Goodbye, brothersI" He then repeated, "’Haven’t we, . . . together, brothers I ’" and | ' I 155,1 Joseph Conrad," Nation, XCVIII (April 9, 191*), 396. 156 ■ "Joseph Conrad: An Appreciation," Bookman (London), XXXIX (January, 1911), 177-178. j 262 exclaimed, "There, or very near it, lies the secret. The writer’s I relation to them, his understanding of them, his sympathy for them, his tenderness, even, towards them, has "been that of shipmate, not of 157 spectator." Before Follett explored the secret Reynolds had discovered, a number of other writers of the period from mid-1912 through 1915 had also anticipated his work. In its comments upon Chance, the Saturday Review said, "There is a rare pitifulness in the telling of the story, as of one who has faced life unflinchingly, learnt its lessons, and i i 1 come out with sympathies quickened. . . . His book breathes the spirit j 158 of a fine charity." George Middleton, in his review of The Nigger \ of the Narcissus (then republished in the United States), said, "Conrad is never the propagandist with a mission: he seeks to broaden human sympathies ... His art is such that one gains a sense that j 159 1 all life is condensed into the lives of those few men." The 1 Atlantic Monthly, in commenting upon Victory, said that Conrad saw Lena and Heyst "somewhat as one may reverently hope the Creator sees us all . . . with absolute detachment, yet with a yearning pity, a i u l 6 ° I vast gentleness. ! Huneker, Curie and Symons also mentioned Conrad's sympathy with ! the persons of his books. "Conrad belongs to no school in art, ; 157 "Joseph Conrad and Sea Fiction," Quarterly Review, CCXVII > (July, 1912), 176. I 158 CXVII (January 2k, 191*0, 118. 159 Bookman, IX (July, 191*0, 583. , Atlantic Monthly, CXVI (October, 1915), 5H» I 263 except the school of humanity," wrote Huneker in one place; "for him there are not types, only humans.” And in another place he wrote, "What I once wrote of Henry James might be said of Joseph Conrad: ’He is exquisitely aware of the presence of others. In his chapter "Conrad as a Psychologist," Curie wrote: To Conrad humanity is the one sane thing in the universe— I mean sane in the sense of having an ordered development and not a mere blind repetition. ... The key to the reality of Conrad’s characters lies in a sympathetic presentation. ... Conrad puts himself, his readers, and his characters on the identical level. . . by admiring courage, compassion, honour, enduranc e. , "Conrad is never indifferent to his people, rarely kind. He sees j them for the most part as they reveal themselves in suffering," said j j Symons. "It is with this agonizing clearness, this pitiless mercy, j | that Conrad shows us human beings. He loves them for their discontent,. ! for their revolt against reality, for their failure, their atonement, J 163 their triumphs." To Follett, however, must go the credit both for the most complete examination of the relationship of Conrad to the people of his books ! and for the full realization of Conrad's deep sympathy with them. j tAfter he had first repeated and objected to Galsworthy's belief in the primacy of nature over man in Conrad’s universe, Follett conceded that i for the "nucleus of the unifying principle" which underlay "the diversities in such books as Almayer’s Folly and Nostrorao," the reader ! 1 | -1 I "The Genius of Joseph Conrad," Worth American Review, CC (August,,191^)) 272 and 27^. - 16? Curie, pp. 98 and lOh. j l63"Conrad," Forum, LIU (May, 1915), 579. 1 264 would have to "look to Mr. Conrad*s mutually hostile conceptions of 164 man and man*s world. From his reading of Conrad, though, Follett was convinced that Conrad's universe was indifferent to the struggles of man. "Ultimately, Conrad's indifferent universe is that of Mr. Thomas Hardy, with the only distinction one of temperament rather than of logic," he said. "Hardy paints the universe so indifferent as to 165 make it malevolent." But, Follett held, Conrad did not believe that the indifference of the ■universe was met by "indifference in the beholder." "Instead," he said, "Conrad uses 'the immense indifference of things'— all things— to heighten the sense of a quite different Jirony, inherent in the very blankness of the wall man has to front, I land the dignity of man himself, his undismayed strivings, his I ' 166 ]indomitable hopes, the lustre of his triumphs." In answer to i jGalsworthy!s earlier claim that the universe was always saying, "The |little part called man is smaller than the whole," Follett wrote: 1 And the paradox wrested from it ^/Conrad's conception of the 1 indifference of the universe/ by the peculiar logic of tempera- , ment is, in a word, that the whole is not greater than the sum I of its parts; that man is in himself greater than the whole of j nature including man. ... In his pagan pragmatism despair i about man (in whom, we can but repeat, fiction finds its centre of gravity) is the final upshot, not of despair about the universe, but of hope. ' "In The Nigger of the Narcissus we find Conrad's aptest possible ! jimage of man's life in the world of space and time," said Follett. "In i 1 I 164 ^ Follett, p. 13. 165 ! Follett, p. 20. : 1 fifi Follett, p. 21. 167 Follett, p. 22. 265 a , scheme without a purpose, except as man can supply one, mankind is the obvious, the only recourse; mankind, not to be censured or rebuked or despised or despaired of, but solely to be enjoyed." From this conception of man Follett made an obvious step to the point of view j which Conrad had twice expressed in his preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus. "In the enjoyment, precisely, of one*s fellows is the characteristic appeal of Mr. Conrad's attitude," he said. "It is . . . as a comrade, one of an undismayed company gathered under the ensign of hope for common war on despair, that he requires 168 exhibition of us. The need for fellowship, believed Follett, was an important j factor in Conrad's novels of persons ashore as well as in his novels ' of the children of the sea. "It is easy (and, in periodical criticism ' . 1 thus far fairly usual) to overstate the proportionate part of the j ;children of the sea in his work," he said. "It is true that the tales I \ j of life afloat involve the forces that unite men in a democracy of 1 |endeavour, whereas the tales of the harbour involve the ones that drag i 169 Jthem into social anarchy." The drift away from one's fellows in 'the novels with land settings, Follett felt, was still an application of Conrad's belief in the importance of solidarity of human life. IFollett described this drift as follows: I A man's natural place among his own kind, his status as of a group or guild, is the most valuable and necessary part of his life; and whatever breaks his contacts or sets a barrier between 1 6 8 » 1 Follett, pp. 4l-A2. ^^Follett, pp. ^8-^9. J 266 him and the rest of humanity, whatever places him at odds with the society of his equals, is by consequence his supreme tragedy, Hence the most profitable of all situations in which he can be encountered is, for the novelist whose task must be to decipher the central mystery of character, the situation of the outcast, in which it is impossible to simulate strength or hide weakness.-*-70 By showing Conrad*s belief in the solidarity of human life as a primary concern in his land fiction as well as in his sea fiction, Follett demonstrated that from 190^ -until mid-1912, when Conrad no longer wrote sea fiction, he was not untrue to his early creed. To further illustrate the logical development of the second period of Conrad's work from the first, Follett suggested that while differing "from his other work in no single particular so largely as in its j substitution of the direct approach for the indirect," Nostromo (the j I first novel of the second period) was still a further application of ] Conrad’s creed. "Elsewhere, as we have said and seen, Mr. Conrad j shows men fallen out of their background: here he shows, in elaborate 1 and detailed expansion, one of those backgrounds out of which they fall," he said. "Hot that the outcast does not enter the pages of this exception among Conrad's books; simply, we view him, when he . I 1 I does enter, through the eyes of those from whom he is severed and 1 from the angle of the law that casts him out." Conrad thus actually did not illustrate his "struggle against odds in Nostromo . . .30 much by a person as by a . monstrous and anti-social vice, a superhuman j moral quality of which the human terms of the drama are variously and j ■^^Follett, p. 52. ' 267] ingeniously illustrational." "Bostromo." Follett concluded, "is the 171 epic of avarice, an outcast among moral qualities." ' Conrad's very narrative method, Follett believed, was a further illustration of his concern for solidarity among human lives. "Conrad employs a narrator at whatever prejudice to rigid economy, expressly to acquire the extra machinery of an audience within the stories," he said. "He studies the effect of the story on the invisible reader whom he can reach vicariously, by indirection— as though he dared not let certain experiences out of his possession until they had undergone 172 the scrutiny of his own half-silent men." As an example of the j effectiveness of this method Follett cited the last pages of "Youth" and "that silent response" of the men who heard Marlow, a response ' "aligning into a single undeviating mood every detail and circumstance ! of the narrative— a fusion none the less triumphant for happening to ( } ' | get itself effected outside the story proper." "The pre-eminent jdistinction of Youth is that it moves men together," he said. "Read I aloud, it quite literally and physically draws the hearers in one by ! j one, until they are indistinguishably lost, and the reader with them 1 173 ^ : in a single tense personality." 1 The importance of having Follett's explication coincide with the | j long delayed acceptance of Conrad's writings by a large number of readers was probably not clear to students of Conrad in 1915« But it I ’ ^ ’ Srollett, p. 59* ! 1"^Follett, pp. 65-66. 173 I Follett, p. 67. 268" did "become clear about four years later, when Conrad wrote in his preface to Chance: What makes this book memorable to me apart from the natural sentiment one has for one's creation is the response it pro voked. The general public responded largely, more largely . perhaps than to any other book of mine, in the only way the j general public can respond, that is by buying a certain number of copies. This gave me a considerable amount of pleasure, because what I always feared most was drifting unconsciously into the position of a writer for a limited coterie; a position which would have been odious to me as throwing a doubt on the soundness of my belief in the solidarity of all mankind in simple ideas and in sincere emotions. In summarizing the developments in Conrad's career as a writer | i during the years from mid-1912 through 1915, not the least important, j certainly, was his achievement of a position of financial security | i from the sale of his books alone. Starting rather noticeably with ■ sales of 'Twixt Land and Sea in 1912 and 1913, Conrad's fortunes as i a popular writer became finally assured with the publication of Chance J in 191^. Not until Victory was published in 1915, however, was he i able to pay off the last of his debts to J. B. Pinker and to look forward to the future with confidence that the sale of his writings would continue to meet all of his financial responsibilities. j Fortunately, he was able to achieve popular success within a frame- I jwork of acceptance which was suitable to his reputation as a writer of j 1 the first rank and as one of the most original writers of his own day. : i Effective answers to adverse criticisms of the past were found by ; 1 I many of the critics of these years. The charge that Conrad could not J characterize women, for example, was answered by several writers, J Richard Curie chief among them. Curie and other critics recognized, ! particularly, the effectiveness of his portrayal of the women characters of his "books of this latest period. The characterization of Lena in Victory was highly praised by a number of critics as a fine characterization and thus became a very effective answer to the earlier critics who had' made objections to Conrad's characterizations | of women. Conrad’s foreignness also tended to be de-emphasized during | i this period, largely by the simple method of neglect by critics. J The seriousness of tone of Conrad’s writings continued to be j i j emphasized and Conrad seems finally to have achieved his popularity I in spite of whatever deterring effect on some readers this feature | of his work may have had. Those who read Conrad * s writing because of j its serious tone found Arthur Symons's article in 1914 the most i thorough appreciation of this feature of his work that had been made. i The interest of critics of this period in Conrad’s absorption with the psychological aspects of fiction writing was expressed in i j two ways that helped to advance Conrad’s reputation during this period. 1 I ; i Many critics, chiefly of 'Twixt Land and Sea, felt that the complexity ( j of this feature of his work which had characterized such novels as I i I Wostromo (190*4-), The Secret Agent (1907), and Under Western Eyes (1911) : was noticeably absent in the fiction of this period. Several critics ' regarded his writing in ’Twixt Land and Sea, as a return to the greater directness of his early work. Others believed that Conrad had achieved greater mastery of this feature of his writing. Conrad's method of narration, which had also been adversely j I criticized during the period from 1904 until mid-1912, also appeared ! to most critics of these years to be either simpler (usually again in ’Twixt Land and Sea) or surer (usually in Chance and Victory). 270 Favorable treatment of both these major features of Conrad1s work by critics other than reviewers helped still more during this period to advance Conrad's literary reputation. Many critics of the years from mid-1912 through 1915 also recog nized in Conrad's writings of those years a return to his familiar setting— the sea. Although the return to the sea was quickly noticed and approved in many reviews (especially those of the first book of this period, 'Twixt Land and Sea) as well as by a number of the newer critics of Conrad, it was not regarded in the same manner by some of j the older critics of these years, who felt that Conrad’s great work— his fiction dealing chiefly with the sea— had been written before 1904.; ! Such men as Galsworthy, Wells, Gosse, and possibly Garnett and James,by their coolness toward Conrad's work of these years seem to fall into this group. The greatest work in furthering Conrad's reputation as a writer during these years was thus performed chiefly by men who had become ( familiar with his work late in his career. For the first time since he had begun to write, Conrad was given extensive help by Americans. ■ i ! j Mary Austin and James Huneker, both of whom had met Conrad by 1909, ] finally wrote extended appreciations of his writings, which were 1 probably quite widely read in this country. After Conrad had written to Alfred A. Knopf a strongly worded complaint of his treatment by his American publisher, successful efforts were made by Knopf to have Doubleday, Page and Company, the publishing firm of which he was a I member, publish and publicize Conrad's writings with renewed vigor. I Especial service to Conrad during this period was rendered by ! 27ll i Richard Curie and Wilson Follett, who wrote and had published the firstj i book-length criticisms of Conrad*s writings. Both of these men ! objected to the terms of Conrad’s acceptance, an acceptance they both j felt did not take into account all of his work. In order to make the quality of the work of the years after 1904 clearer to their readers, both men gave careful treatment to Wostromo (1904), The Secret Agent j (1907), and Under Western Eyes (1911), which novels they felt had not | been fully appreciated and had been only partially understood when they appeared. I To Follett particularly, however, must go the credit for < I explicating the whole of Conrad's work in terms of Conrad * s own ; i t theory of fiction writing. After the publication of Galsworthy’s 1 appreciation of Conrad’s writings in 1908, with its contention that in Conrad’s world man occupied a place secondary to that of nature, a i number of critics had taken an opposed view of Conrad’s attitude ! toward the people of his books. By 1915 such critics as Frederic 1 ; Taber Cooper, Edwin Bjorkman, Perceval Gibbon, Stephen Reynolds, ! H, W. Boynton, James Huneker, and Arthur Symons had recognized i Conrad’s profound compassion toward the people of his booksj and in ' 1915 Follett made a thorough examination of Conrad’s attitude, based ' both upon the profession of belief in the solidarity of human life i I which Conrad had made in the preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus , in 1897, and also upon Conrad’s writings since that time. Follett ( I demonstrated that Conrad’s practice had for eighteen years been equal to his theory and that the secret of Conrad’s writings was to be obtained only from fully comprehending this belief. Follett's 272] i conception was later fully substantiated by Conrad himself, who in 1919 re-affirmed his belief in the solidarity of human life and the importance of popular acceptance of his writings because of this belief. j SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary Through the years from his earliest publication in 1895 until the end of 1915, Conrad’s writings achieved varying degrees of popularity ; with the public and with professional critics. The differing phases of their popularity fall into roughly three periods: 1895 through 1903, when they were favorably received by most of the professional critics of the day but were not widely sold; 190^ until mid-1912, when they were unfavorably received by a number of the professional critics i I and again were not widely sold; and mid-1912 through 1915. » when they i were once more favorably received by most of the professional critics i of the day and were at last widely sold. ; In 1895, when Almayer’s Folly was published in England and the j United States, Conrad was recognized in periodical reviews as a writer of great talent. He did not, however, become famous at once; 1 in fact, many American reviewers did not recognize his abilities as a i writer of fiction until his second novel, An Outcast of the Islands, i i j was published in 1896. Most reviewers of the second novel, whether : , British or American, recognized Conrad as a writer seldom equaled in t his ability to create atmosphere. Recognition of this ability had [ not been common in American reviews of Almayer’s Folly earlier, most ' American critics being inclined merely to comment upon that novel as j ' an attempt to use a new region of the world as a source of local j color. Not until publication of An Outcast of the Islands did American as well as British critics recognize that Conrad used his 2jk knowledge of the tropics not just to provide a believable setting for the action of his novel but as a pervasive emotional atmosphere which was reflected in the lives of his characters. wlierL The Nigger of the Narcissus and Tales of Unrest were I published in 1898, most periodicals in both English-speaking countries j remarked that Conrad was able to create atmosphere from a sea setting I ! just as he had earlier done from a tropical setting. After these two j books were published, it was indeed difficult to find a review in I which doubt was expressed about Conrad’s ability to create atmosphere, i But in appraisals of the first four books periodicals did not agree j upon the extent of his ability either as a creator of character or as 1 1 Ja stylist. Adverse judgments upon the characterizations or the style j J Almayer’s Folly or An Outcast of the Islands were not rare in I j comments upon those books and were still to be found in later remarks | on The Nigger of the Narcissus and Tales of Unrest. In 1900 Lord Jim convinced almost all reviewers of Conrad’s ability to create character. Eecognition of this ability, fortunately 1 for Conrad, did not cause periodicals to reduce their attentions to the continuing importance of atmosphere as a major feature of his work. | In reviews of Lord Jim and Conrad's next two volumes, Youth in 1902 and I Typhoon and Other Stories in 1903,1 the organic fusion of these two I 1 features in Conrad's writings was often mentioned. Garnett, who saw 1 : in this fusion what he believed to be one of the most important 1 I ! "^As already stated, Typhoon was published separately in the United States in 1902, whereas the other four stories in the English j volume were published in this country as Falk in 1903* 275 features of Conrad's work— his "psychology of scene" (see above, p.52) commented upon it at length. Recognition of Conrad’s ability to create character was delayed I even longer than recognition of his mastery of style. Adverse comments on his style, which were not infrequent in criticisms of Almayer’s Folly and An Outcast of the Islands and which took up a I great part of H. G. Wells's review of the second book (see above, p.21) continued to be made at times in criticisms of The Rigger of the Narcissus, Tales of Unrest, and Lord Jim. But in reviews of Youth i i and Typhoon and Other Stories such adverse comments disappeared almostJ j entirely. 1 | During these early years many of the leading literary men in < I : England praised Conrad’s fiction. Galsworthy’s description of the I effect of Almayer’s Polly on the literary men of that time as one | which made them rub their eyes with astonishment (see above, p. 30) seems not to have been an exaggeration. Edward Garnett, John Galsworthy, and E. V. Lucas became ardent admirers of Conrad’s work as soon as they read Almayer’s Folly in 1895; and H. G. Wells, Henry i i I James, and Arthur Symons joined them in praising Conrad's work after j they had read An Outcast of the Islands in 1896. By the end of 1903, j . after seven of Conrad’s books had been published, other literary men (Sir Hugh Clifford, Arnold Bennett, Richard Bontine Cunninghame Graham, William Ernest Henley, Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, Stephen Crane, W. H. 1 Hudson, Edmund Gosse, and George Gissing) had each expressed his admiration of Conrad’s writings either to Conrad himself or to some one who knew him. Although most of the expressions of admiration were j 2? 6~ ! private (Clifford's published article of 1902 and the reviews of Garnett, Wells, and Quiller-Couch being exceptions), they must certainly have constituted for Conrad a most important type of j recognition. Although by the end of 1903 Conrad was recognized by many critics, among them his chief literary contemporaries, as one of the leading writers of his time, he was probably not aware of the terms of his acceptance. Wot until toward the middle of the period which followed (from 190^ until mid-1912), did it become apparent that Conrad had j gained acceptance chiefly as a writer of fiction with the sea or the tropical seacoast as its setting. He was also accepted by his admirers as a deeply serious writer whose attitude was reflected in ; the tone of his work (not infrequently designated by his critics as "sombre" or "melancholy"), and in his deep devotion to the craft of | fiction. Furthermore, because of his narrative method as well as his 1 style, he was accepted by the end of 1903 as one of the most original writers of his time. Some critics, unfortunately, used the word "unique" in describing his fiction, with the result that he began to achieve a reputation as a writer for a special group of readers, 1 | The novels which Conrad wrote with Ford Madox Hueffer during 1 these years probably had little direct effect on his reputation as a writer. Both The Inheritors (1901) and Romance (1903) were poorly received by reviewers and were almost completely neglected by the 1 major literary men who were inclined during these years to read avidly : each book Conrad wrote. Hueffer, himself one of the foremost admirers i of Conrad's writing by the end of 1903, probably performed his | ------ - - 277; greatest service to Conrad as a . confidant with whom he could talk at length about literary problems— a service which would be of only indirect influence on Conrad’s writings and difficult to appraise. \ i When Conrad began to write KTostromo in 1903, he set for himself ! ! the task of writing what became the longest of all his novels, with j imagination as virtually his only source of inspiration. ,To a very j I great degree he relied on his imagination for all his fiction of the period from 190h, (the year in which Nostromo was published) until mid-1912, and he allowed memory to inspire only his non-fictional books; of reminiscence during this same period. Thus the novels of these j years— The Secret Agent (1907) and Under Western Eyes (1911)— and the I 2 one book of short tales— A Set of Six (1908)--were written chiefly from imagination, whereas the two books of reminiscence--The Mirror of 3 ! j the Sea (1906) and A Personal Record (1911) — were written from | i j jmemory. Conrad's desertion of memory as a source of fiction from 190*+ I 1 to mid-1912 is difficult to understand because during the years from 1895 until the end of 1903 it had been for him the chief source of 1 1 ; The Nigger of the Narcissus (1898), several of the stories in Tales of ! 1 ^Unrest (1898), all of the stories in Youth (1902), and most of the stories in Typhoon (1903). It is clear, at any rate, that in 1903 he 2 As previously mentioned, only one story of this English volume was published in the United States before 191^. The final story of the volume was separately published in this country as The Point of Honor in 1908. 3 The title finally given the volume in the collected works was A Personal Becord, the title it first appeared under in the United States. When it appeared in England, it was entitled Some Reminiscences. 278 had not exhausted it as a . source of fiction because he was to return to it for many of the volumes of fiction published after mid-1912. From 1904 until mid-1912 Conrad also departed from the settings of his early work, except as they were 'to serve as settings for his two volumes of reminiscence. Many critics of his novels of these years expressed regret that such a fine master of fiction of the seacoast and of the sea had turned to the land and had ceased to write about his exotic natives and his splendid seamen. That many i major literary figures shared this view was implicit both from the fervor with which men like Garnett, Galsworthy, Lucas, Wells, and > James received the publication of The Mirror of the Sea in 1906 and from the comparative lack of praise by such men of the novels of this period. This is certainly not to say that Conrad ceased to enjoy after 190* 1 - the esteem he had attained among professional critics as one of the leading writers of the time. Recognition of his great talent, or genius, was frequent in reviews and articles of these years. Wo 1 less than at the end of 1903, Conrad was recognized from 190*1- through 1 ^ mid-1912 as one of the most original writers of his time and as a |writer seriously devoted to his craft. Indeed, the thesis that he was one of the greatest devotees of art for art’s sake then living, was developed very fully during this second period of his literary production. As before 190*+, Conrad’s critics sometimes called his work merely "unique" or "unusual," rather than "original," and emphasized its "uniqueness" by attributing it entirely or in part to the circumstance 279 of Conrad’s past life in Poland and France and on the sea. And occasionally a critic insisted that he was more Slav than English— or more French than English— in his outlook and his work, as in Clifford’s appreciation (see above, p.126). Such expressions- as these probably hurt Conrad’s reputation with some readers, at least to Conrad himself any insistence upon what he called "foreignness" in his work was distasteful. Closely allied to the seriousness with which Conrad regarded the I role of the fiction writer during these years was the very serious j manner in which he looked at life in his fiction. The serious tone of | his writing was remarked upon by a number of critics after 1904, as it ■ had been before that time. During the period from 1904 until mid-1912 j jonly one story, "The Point of Honor," was regarded by a majority of j jcritics as relatively comic in tone (just as only one story of the j first period, "Typhoon," had been) and even its appearance had the effect among critics of the second period of emphasizing, by contrast, the seriousness of Conrad’s other work. Critics after 1904 commented frequently on the inferior role of • t ^women in Conrad’s fiction. Frederic Taber Cooper, for example, said ! t I that because Conrad’s books were accounts of heroes rather than 1 I I 'heroines, his fiction would probably always be of primary, if not ialmost exclusive, interest to men. Cooper and other writers further ! I maintained that Conrad was incapable of writing the kind of romance ' between a man and a woman which would attract readers in great numbers. ■ A further reason for the delay in popular success to a time after ! I 1912 was the fact that Conrad received very little recognition in the United States, except from anonymous reviewers. The two earliest criticisms in this country of his work, John A. Macy’s study in 1906 and Stewart Edward White’s review of The Secret Agent in 1907 (see above, p. 13*0 contained so many adverse comments that Conrad’s reputation with readers in this country was undoubtedly harmed. Among leading American critics of these years, only Frederic Tabor Cooper did much to improve Conrad’s reputation in the United States, and Cooper’s help was limited to occasional favorable reviews until 1912, when he published a fairly long appreciation of Conrad (see above, P* 138). Even though Conrad’s work bad become deeply admired during 1908 or 1909 by both Mary Austin and James Huneker, neither of these j ! ; I writers published an appreciation of his work until 1914, by which 1 time Conrad had already achieved a fair measure of popularity with readers of this country. i To Conrad’s difficulty in pleasing Americans with his writings of the years from 1904 until mid-1912 were added further difficulties in ! pleasing English critics of his books. An occasional one here or in I » England failed entirely to grasp the scope or purpose of such a novel las Nostromo. The Secret Agent, or Under Western lyes and adversely |criticized it without really understanding it. More serious in its 1 'consequent effect on Conrad's reputation, however, was the more : frequent comment that Conrad’s fiction of these years was psycholog- ! : i ;ica.lly more complex than the fiction published before 1904, or that it 1 was presented to the reader by means of a more complex narrative 1 method. A number of critics of Nostromo, for example, objected to the , number of characters in that novel as well as to the fact that there ! 281 was no clear focus on a central figure in the novel, as there had been earlier in Lord Jim* Other critics objected to the unfolding of the story by means of a frequently shifted point of view, as one character after another in the book became Conrad's narrator. Still others objected to Conrad's non-sequential use of time in the novel. Objections to Conrad's over-emphasis of psychological motivation > ! (usually at the expense of atmosphere-building), as well as to. the complexity of his narrative method, were made often in periodical comments upon The Secret Agent and Under Western Byes. In almost every | i review in which these objections appeared there were admissions (even more strongly phrased than those in reviews of the fiction published ■ } before 190^) that Conrad's work was so difficult that it could not, or t I probably would not, be read by the common reader. It is quite clear that the common reader (as James was later to | call him) did express a decided indifference to all of Conrad's books published from 1895 until mid-1912. Based upon the size of the early printings of these books, or upon the time it took for any of them to reach a sizable reprinting, none of them could be called popular i |successes. During the period from 1895 through 1903, the largest jfirst printing in England of any of Conrad's books was 4,500 copies. j Both The Nigger of the Narcissus (1898) and Typhoon (1903) were given j printings of that size. During the same period, the smallest first printing in England was one of only 1,500 copies--the size of the first printing of Almayer's Folly (1895) and The Inheritors (1901). If these figures can be relied upon as some gauge of the indifference of English readers of the period from 1895 through 1903, the figures I 282 for the largest and smallest printings of the period from 190* 1 - until mid-1912 reflect an. even greater indifference, for during the second period the largest first printing in England was one of only 3,000 copies (of Nostromo in 190*4- and of Under Western Eyes in 1911), and the smallest was one of only 1,000 copies (of Some Reminiscences in 1912). Begarded in still another way, the low ebb of Conrad’s ; fortunes with English readers by mid-1912 can be seen in the fact that I his final book of the period was given a printing only two-thirds the size of the first book published during the earlier period. His lack of success with the public from 1895 until mid-1912 is further made | clear from the fact that the average first printing of each of his books in England during these years was only about 2,700 copies. Evidence that his work was less popular in England from 190*+ until I mid-1912 than it was from 1895 through 1903 is revealed by a comparison! 1 of the average first printings of his books in England during the two I periods--somewhat over 2,000 copies during the second period as compared with somewhat over 3,100 copies during the first period. Although significant, the small first printings of Conrad’s books iin England during the first seventeen years of his career as a writer j do not in themselves tell the whole story of his limited reception by 'the public during these years. To the important fact of the small first printings of Conrad’s books in England up until mid-1912 must be added the not less important fact that it took an average of slightly over ten years for the books of these years to be reprinted. And to this fact must be added the strong likelihood that Conrad probably fared no better in the United States as a popular writer than he did 283 in England during these years. It is of course true that Harpers made a first printing of 6,450 copies of Nostromo (1904) and first printings of The Mirror of the Sea (1906), The Secret Agent (1907), and Under j Western Eyes (1912) that ran between 4,050 and 5,000 copies each, but Conrad’s fortunes with other American publishers were less satisfac- j I tory. Although the absence of information in the United States makes ! I it impossible to re-construct a record comparable to that obtained from his English publishers, the very frequency of change of I publisher’s name on the title-pages of the books printed in this ! country shows that most American publishers found publication of J [ 1 Conrad to be unprofitable. If we count as one publisher the I ] publishing houses in which the names of McClure or Doubleday appeared, j I there were still seven different publishers’ names which appeared on the fifteen first editions of Conrad’s books printed in the United States between 1895 and mid-1912. As a result of the small and infrequent printings of Conrad's books in England and the United States during these years, he was forced to borrow constantly. By 1900 he had received advances from both Heinemann in England and McClure in the United States against 1 1 |eventual publication of The Rescue, a novel that was not finally , 1 i 1 completed for publication until 1920. His letters of these years to ! i Galsworthy and other friends revealed his extreme embarrassment at not ! 1 | being able to complete the novel and absolve himself from debt, but I they did not make clear exactly how he finally extricated himself (if he -was able to do so) from the position in which his inability to write on schedule placed him. Borrowing against the possibility of 28^ eventual popularity as a writer became for Conrad necessary to an even greater degree in the years which followed 1900. As book followed book from the printing houses of England and the United States without widening his circle of readers, he was forced more and more into "recourse to Pinker," as he described his borrowing from his literary agent, J. B. Pinker. The unprofitability of his earlier career as a writer, if considered entirely in financial terms, wa.s eloquently demonstrated to Conrad by the hard fact that at mid-1912 he owed i Pinker more than 1,500 pounds. ' Since he was unable before mid-1912 to realize a satisfactory J income from the sale of initial printings of his books or from the j sale of re-printings of them, Conrad tried other mdthods of securing j an income that would reduce the necessity of borrowing. He wrote ■ periodical articles at different times, sold the manuscript of An Outcast of the Islands (for only 30 pounds) and finally, through the ;assistance of friends like Sir Edmund Gosse and William Bothenstein, ] * iwas able in 1911 to secure a Civil List pension. But these sources of . I income, all except the third (which of course came very late) did little to put him in a position of real financial security. : Meanwhile, as his books appeared, he went on hoping for the one ithat would finally bring him popularity; and as each successive 1 I .book failed to do this, he sank further and further into despair. He 1 ! ;wrote cynically to Galsworthy of the absurdity of the public and | speculated upon the reasons for his unpopularity. His "foreignism" ! seemed to him the reason why, unlike Hardy and Meredith, he was unable 1 to secure a sufficiently large number of readers to make writing 285 profitable for him. There is some evidence also that he became more than ever aware of the adverse criticisms of reviewers and other professional critics. His suspicion of publishers, which he had expressed to Garnett during the first days of his writing career, also ! f grew during these years, so that he carried with him to the end of his life a belief that publishers were interested in writers only j from a financial viewpoint. Added to his other difficulties from 1895 until mid-1912, particularly to those of the last eight years of this period, was the fact that illnesses and other difficulties such as the accidental ! burning of the manuscript of "The End of the Tether" plagued him relentlessly. To the illnesses of Mrs. Conrad and the children i (especially those of the children during the writing of The Secret ; Agent in 1906) were added the not infrequent attacks of Conrad's old -enemy, the gout. According to his own estimates, which he made at 1 t different times to Galsworthy and others, illnesses cost him nearly one-quarter of his time for writing during the first seventeen ; years of his literary career. In view of the difficulties of Conrad's position by mid-1912, it ; is surprising that he was able to achieve popularity and financial ! security as quickly thereafter as he did. The tide of public opinion } began to turn in his favor with the publication of 'Twixt Land and Sea . I in the summer of 1912. At that time J. M. Dent, Conrad's new English publisher, demonstrated his confidence in Conrad’s ability to write a i saleable book by publishing 14,330 copies of this book, more copies than there had been in the total printings in England of all the books " , 286 of the years from 190*4- until mid-1912--Nostromo (190* 4 -), The Mirror of the Sea, (1906), The Secret Agent (1907), A Set of Six (1908), Under Western Eyes (1911), and Some Reminiscences (1912). Even greater first printings of Chance, in 191*4- and Victory in 1915 were made by Methuen and Company, and sold. So successful indeed were Conrad's hooks of the period from mid-1912 through 1915 that by the end of this period ! he was able to pay his entire debt to Pinker and find himself assured j of a satisfactory future income from his writings. I | In achieving a fairly wide popularity as a writer, Conrad still retained his reputation with most critics as a writer of the first j I rank, as one of the most original writers of his day, and as a writer j deeply devoted-'to his craft. In contrast to the period from 190*4- untii I mid-1912, however, during which time a number of critics regarded him ; 1 j as a gifted writer who had not completely mastered his craft, most j j critics of the years from mid-1912 through 1915 regarded him as a ' ■ writer who had overcome the difficulties that had characterized his work of earlier years. When "Pwixt Land and Sea appeared in 1912, several critics wrote jfavorably of his women characters of that volume either as more likely to please popular tastes or as finer characterizations of women than i those in his earlier books. The characterization of Floral de Barral I in Chance (particularly because she was successfully portrayed in a I ^romantic role) also helped to counter the objections of earlier 1 critics that Conrad could not create an effective woman character or could not keep a woman from assuming an inferior role in a love affair. Whatever doubts critics harbored in 1915 about Conrad's ability to I 287 dramatize the role of a woman in love were removed by the appearance of Victory, which gave Lem, the heroine, an important place in the most dramatic occurrences of the novel. By the end of 1915 Conrad was accepted by critics as a completely naturalized British writer. His Polish ancestry was less a topic of interest to magazine writers of this period, largely because it had ceased to possess novelty; therefore, Conrad ceased to a great extent during this period to be regarded as a foreigner. Less attention I jwas also given, in criticisms of these years, to French and "Slavic" ! influences on his writing, with the result that he had less cause than : formerly to complain of the charge of "foreignism" in criticisms of i | I his work. Further help to Conrad in this respect came from the assertion by Ford Madox Hueffer and other writers that Conrad had I glorified the character of the British people,‘ especially that of i I British sea-faring men. i i Becognition by many critics before mid-1912 that Conrad’s view of life was almost unrelievedly serious and that his view was reflected in the tone of his work was carried over into this period of his !career, and it became clear that his readers would be those who would jeither enjoy his writing because of this feature of his work or in j I spite of it. During this period Arthur Symons made a . thorough analysis! I of this feature of his work, without either commending or condemning :±t . 1 ( . ! ¥ Many critics praised Conrad’s work of this period either because they felt that it was less complex than that of the years from 1904 I .'until mid-1912 or because they felt that Conrad had achieved mastery | " " ' 288 of his method of probing human character or of telling his story. Critics of the first type were chiefly reviewers of 'Twixt Land and Sea, a volume of stories which, they recognized, contained little of the complexity of characterization or narrative method to be found in such earlier volumes as Nostromo. The Secret Agent, or Under Western Eyes. Moreover, in spite of the character probing and narration ! I within narration in Chance, the second book of this period, most critics of that novel regarded it as written by a man who had mastered all the difficult features of his craft. And the critics were nearly unanimous in their praise when Victory appeared, in 1915* Besides being hailed by many critics as marking Conrad’s return f I to a fairly direct narrative method, ’Twixt land and Sea was also I hailed by many critics in 1912 as marking the author’s return to the sea. Some writers recognized that Conrad’s people were, as the title of the book suggested, marginal people belonging to both land and sea i ! (and to neither alone), but for most critics the volume marked a i return to a setting and a type of people he had portrayed with ; greater ease than he had the revolutionaries and anarchists of the I ifiction published from 190^ until mid-1912. The subsequent appearance of Chance, with the sea as the setting for much of its action and with • seamen again as the heroes of the book, carried forward among many ' critics the belief that Conrad, both writer and sailor, was again at j home on the sea. Victory also took readers to scenes similar to * i those in Conrad's earliest books and was hence hailed by some critics j as a return to the sea. Noteworthy also in the improvement of Conrad’s position as a j 289 writer during the years from mid-1912 through 1915 was the attention paid to his work hy American critics and the interest taken in his affairs by his American publisher. During this period Mary Austin, whom Conrad called "the first voice from America" (see above, p. 2k6), published a long appreciation of his work. This was shortly followed by a similar article by James Huneker. Furthermore, largely because of Conrad * s complaints to Alfred A. Khopf of the firm of .Doubleday and Company, that firm began to buy from other American publishers the rights to Conrad*s earlier books and to republish them. As a result of Knopf's effort in Conrad's behalf, A Set of Six was published for the first time in the United States in 191^, and The Nigger of the Narcissus was republished in this country during the following year. Republication of the second novel at this time was especially note worthy because it marked its first appearance in this country under that title and its first appearance in either England or the United States with Corrad1s preface of 1897 included in the same book with the novel. Although information is not now available from the present firm of Doubleday and Company on reprintings of earlier novels during this period, it is clear that in 191^ - that firm began a vigorous I jcampalgn of both advertising and reprinting Conrad's earlier work, which was profitable to both Conrad and his American publisher. | Important also in improving Conrad's position as a writer was ( the appearance near the end of this period of the first books on jConrad, books in which his work was thoroughly examined and in which he was defended against some of the adverse criticisms of previous years. Richard Curie and Wilson Follett each published books in which 290 they made special efforts to emphasize the importance of the work of the period from 190h through mid-1912. At a time when literary men , like Galsworthy, Wells, and Gosse and (to a lesser degree) Garnett and James were finding Conradrs work less to their liking than the sea fiction and sea reminiscence of earlier years, it was indeed fortunate that such new champions as Curie and Follett appeared. Although Curie performed important service to Conrad by defending his early work against the charge that it contained no effective women characters and by calling the attention of readers to the j relatively neglected novel Hostromo. Follett must be credited with I the first careful attempt to find a principle which would explain the continuous development of Conrad's work from Almayer's Folly in 1895 through Victory in 1915- The principle itself was not new, having j | been affirmed by Conrad himself in his preface to The Nigger of the |Narcissus in 1897 as "the solidarity in mysterious origin, in toil, in joy, in hope, in uncertain fate, which binds men to each other and all mankind to the visible world." Partly, however, because of the 1 jlimited circulation of Conrad's preface and partly because of I 1 Galsworthy*s contention in 1908 that in Conrad's universe nature was ‘ I ! •first and man second, the importance of Conrad’s belief in human ties I had been for years neglected. Such writers as Frederic Tabor Cooper ! 'and Edwin Bjorkman in the United States and Perceval Gibbon and ■ ■ Stephen Reynolds in England had taken issue with Galsworthy after ‘ 1908, but it remained for Follett, in 1915* to unlock the door to • much of Conrad * s writing by means of this key Conrad himself had offered critics at the beginning of his literary career. To be j 291 understood by the critics alone, however, was not enough for Conrad. He felt that if his belief in the solidarity of mankind was to be properly accepted, it had to be accepted by a wide circle of readers. The year 1915 > as he said in his preface to Chance (see above, p. 268), brought him the wide popularity that he felt was a pre-requisite to acceptance of his most basic views. Conclusions This study shows that Conrad’s works were favorably received from almost the beginning of his literary career by many of the professional critics of his day, especially reviewers; and ‘ that the j favorable reception by critics did not lead to large sales. Careful I examination of writings both by and about Conrad during 1895-1915 has J revealed definite reasons for the delay in popular appreciation of j i his works. I One reason for the delay, apparent in the earliest reviews and later, is that Conrad’s work was unusual, or strange, in style and in setting. Another and closely related reason is that many critics of Conrad’s work referred to his early life in Poland and France, often with the suggestion that his writing revealed his foreign background, j I !This suggestion of "foreignism" (as Conrad called it) was not as | i j 'important a deterrent to wide acceptance as Conrad believed, but it j prevented popular favor in some degree. i I Along with the strangeness in style and setting in Conrad’s work, j critics generally and even some leading literary men pointed out its I difficulty for the average reader. This difficulty, many of them felt, 292 was based to a great extent on the way in which he told his stories. Critics like Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch and John Macy objected to his habit of filtering his story through such a narration as Marlow’s, as well as to his non-sequential use of time and his frequent cessation of action to let his characters (as Macy said) "radiate states of mind." Although most critics of Conrad’s books published before 190*4- admitted that his method resulted in greater intensity, many critics of such later books as Nostromo (190*4-), The Secret Agent (1906), and Under Western Eyes (1911) objected that it produced more obscurity than intensity. This attitude was in noticeable contrast to that of most critics of Chance (191*4-) and Victory (1915)* who felt that 'Conrad's narrative method made his fiction both intense and clear. ! As Frederic Taber Cooper suggested, Conrad's fiction before mid- (1912 probably had only a limited appeal to women readers, chiefly because of the relative absence in it of love affairs. Other women readers must have objected, as Grace Isabel Colbron did early in 191*4» to the inferior role given to women in novels like An Outcast of the Islands and Lord Jim. Not until the publication of Chance (191*4-), in iwhich Flora, de Barral (with her likeness on the dust jacket) was t I assigned a . role equal to the roles of the two leading men in the book, l 1 did this objection cease in criticisms of Conrad's work. ( The unrelieved seriousness of tone in Conrad's writing was 'Commented upon by critics early and late, and, in spite of the relative lightness of tone in an occasional story (such as "Typhoon" or "The Point of Honor"), many critics informed their readers that Conrad’s true medium was tragedy. Thus the popularity Conrad finally 293 achieved was with readers who liked the seriousness of tone they found in his work, or with readers who found other attractions in it which outweighed any dislike they had of this feature. Conrad seems also to have made a choice in 1903 which probably caused a delay of several years in his popular success. In that year, while writing Nostromo. he turned his back on memory as the chief j source, and on the sea as the setting, for his fiction;. In doing this he virtually put aside the reputation he had gained by the end of 1903 i as a writer of superb sea fiction and turned to writing novels with land settings which were not very favorably received by critics or by j the reading public. Being then in extreme financial difficulty, Conrad was ill-prepared to endure this delay in popular success. In fact,1he ' I delay itself contributed to a still longer delay because his worry ^ over finances, along with the physical and emotional extremities of | the years from 1904- until mid-1912, often caused him to send books to J his publishers which he felt were below the quality of much of his I earliest work. Paradoxically, Conrad's very success with critics by 190*1- as a :writer of sea fiction had the effect of delaying both his popular j success and full understanding of his work by critics. Zeal for his !writings about the sea was probably strongest among such leading ! literary men of the time as Edward Garnett, John Galsworthy, H. G. ; Wells, Henry James, and Edmund Gosse. During the years from 1904 until; i mid-1912 the lack of interest of such men in Conrad's land fiction was apparent from their silence about it. Many critics, reviewers especially, drew unfavorable comparisons between his land fiction of 29k the years from 190k -until mid-1912 and his earlier sea fiction. A further reason for the delay in popularity was that influential critics in the United States were slow to recommend Conrad’s work to their readers. No article on Conrad by an American was published until John Macy’s appeared in the Atlantic Monthly in 1906. Macy*s article, in many respects unfavorable, was the only one by a major American critic before 1912— save for one favorable article by Frederic Tabor Cooper. Although both Mary Austin and James Huneker were correspond ing with Conrad by 1909, neither of them published appreciations of ! his work until 19lk. j Unfortunately Conrad’s influential admirers in England were also I | slow to publish appreciations of his work, (holy Garnett, Wells, { [Clifford, Galsworthy, and Hueffer wrote appreciations which were i i published before 1912. Meanwhile, although men like James, Gosse, Gissing, Hudson, Graham, Lucas, and Colvin wrote or told Conrad privately how much they admired his work, none of them expressed his ! I admiration in public print. When Conrad finally attained popularity, it was partly because | new admirers both praised and explicated his work just at a time when 1 I older admirers had become silent about it. The insistence of both jBichard Curie and Wilson Follett that the work of the years from 190k | ; i until mid-1912 ranked with Conrad’s finest must have helped to swell | - | the tide of public opinion that was already running in Conrad's favor 1 by 191k-191% ; It would be wrong, of course, to believe that Conrad ever became popular in the sense that such a writer as Kipling was. His popularity! 295 was very modest compared to that of a number of writers of his own time. But when compared with the lack of popularity of the earlier years, even this was for Conrad a triumph, if only because it at last 'made him financially independent as a writer. Furthermore, he finally achieved this limited popularity without willingly debasing the quality of his work, even though a wider public acceptance of that work did not come until he had been writing for almost twenty years. Thus, in spite of the difficulties, Conrad, like Hardy and Meredith— whose careers he had at times compared with his own— did at last become in a limited sense a popular writer. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CITiD Alden, William L. "Mr. Alden’s Views," New York Times Supplement (February 13, 1904), P. 109. _____________ . Note on Conrad, New York Times Supplement (May 6, 1899), P. 304. _____________ . Review of "The Heart of Darkness," New York Times Supplement (June 17, 1899), p. 388. _______________ . Review of "The Heart of Darkness," New York Times« - Supplement (October 3, 1900), p. 138. __________ . Review of Lord Jim, New York Times Supplement * • (November 10, 1900), p. 700; (December 1, 1900), pp. 836 and 839. ] Review of Nostromo, New York Times Supplements 1 (October 29, 1904), p. 735. 1 I___________ . Review of Youth, New York Times Supplement^ I (December 13, 1902), p. 898. 1 I Austin, Mary. "A Sermon in One Man," Harper*s Weekly (May l6, 1914), | pt. 2, p. 20. [ Bennett, Arnold. The Journal of Arnold Bennett. New York, 1933. | ______________ . "A Letter to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to ! Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. ' 1 Berryman, John. Stephen Crane. New York, 1950. ! Bjorkman, Edwin. "Joseph Conrad: Master of Literary Color," American ! Monthly Review of Reviews, XLV (May 1912), 557-60. f ,Borie, Edith. Review of Victory, New Republic, II (April 17, 1915), ; 6-7. i 1 jBoynton, H. W. "Joseph Conrad," Nation, XCVTII (April 9, 1914), 395-97* ! . Brooks, Van Wyck. Review of Richard Curlefe Joseph Conrad, New Republic, I (December 26, 1914), 26-27. Charteris, Evan. The Life and Letters of Sir Edmund Gosse. New York and London, 1931* Clifford, Hugh. "The Art of Mr. Joseph Conrad," Spectator, LXXXIX (November 29, 1902), 827-28. 297 Cliffordj Hugh. "The Genius of Mr. Joseph Conrad," North American Review, CLXXVIII (June 190*0, 842-52. A Sketch of Joseph Conrad," Harper1s Weekly (January l4, 1905), pt. 2, p. 59 Colbron, Grace Isabel. "Joseph Conrad's Women," Bookman, XXXVII (January 1914), 476-479. . Review of Victory, Bookman, XLI (May 1915), 322-23. Colvin, Sidney. Memories and Notes of Persons and Places. New York, 1921. . Review of Victory, Observer (May 1915), pp. 135-38. ^Conrad, Jessie. Joseph Conrad as I Knew Him. New York, 1926. ______________. Joseph Conrad and His Circle. New York, 1935* Conrad, Joseph. Complete Works. 26 vols. New York, 1924-1926. . Letters of Joseph Conrad to Marguerite Poradowska, trans. from French and ed. John A. Gee and Paul J. Sturm. New Haven, 1940. _________. Some Reminiscences. London, 1912. . Preface to The Nigger of the Narcissus. New York, 1914. A Conrad Memorial Library, ed. George T. Keating. New York, 1929* "Conrad’s First Ship," Bookman, XVI (April 1915), 129- "Conrad's Profession of Artistic Faith," Current Literature, LII (April 1912), 470-72. Cook, George Cram. Review of Under Western Eyes, Chicago Evening Post (March 24, 1911), sec. 6, p. 1. Cooper, Frederic Taber. "Representative English Story Tellers," Bookman, XXXV (March.1912), 61-70. _____________________ . Review of Falk, Bookman, XVIII (November 1, 1903), 310-11. . Review of Nostromo, Bookman,XX (November 1904), 216-I8. Cooper, Frederic Taber. Review of The Secret Agent. Bookman. XXVI (February 1908), 669-70. ____________________ . Beview of Under Western Eyes, Bookman, XXIV (December 1911), hkO-h-2. Crane, Stephen. "Two Letters to Joseph Conrad.” In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. '""'Curie, Bichard. Joseph Conrad: A Study. New York, 191^. "Joseph Conrad and Victory," Fortnightly Review, CIV (October 1915), 67O-78. Curran, E. F. "A Master of Language," Catholic World, XCII (March 1911), 796”805, Dawson, Warrington. "Joseph Conrad,” New York Times (February 2, 1913), P. 51. Dunbar, 0. H. Beview of Nostromo, Critic, XLVI (April 1905), 377-78. Follett, Wilson. Joseph Conrad: A Short Study of His Intellectual and Emotional Attitude toward His Work and of the Chief Characteristics of His Novels. New York, 1915* Frederic, Harold. Beview of The Nigger of the "Narcissus,"/^ Saturday Beview, LXXXV (February 12, 1898), 211. Galsworthy, John. "Joseph Conrad: A Disquisition," Fortnightly Review. N. S., LXXXIII (April 1908), 627-33. _______________ . "A Letter to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. _______________ . "Reminiscences of Joseph Conrad." In Castles in I Spain and Other Screeds. New York, 1927. ! Garland, Hamlin. My Friendly Contemporaries: A Literary Log. New | York, 1932. i Garnett, Constance. "A Letter to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 192o. I Garnett, Edward. "Four Letters to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. George Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. 1_________ . "Introductory Essay." In Conrad's Prefaces to His Works. London, 1937. 299 Garnett, Edward, ed. Letters from John Galsworthy. London, 193^-• l ______________ , ed. Letters from Joseph Conrad^ 1895-1924. London, 1928. "Mr. Joseph. Conra-d: An Appreciation," Academy, LV I (October 15, 1898), 82-83. ! 1 ______________. Review of Youth. Academy and Literature. LXIII (December 6, 1902), 606-607. Gibbon, Perceval. "Joseph Conrad: An Appreciation," Bookman (London), XXXIX (January 1911), 177-79. _______________ . Review of Under Western Eyes, Bookman (London), XLI (November 1911) , 9^—95. • Gissing, George. "Two Letters to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. I Gordan, John D. Joseph Conrad: The Making of a Novelist. Cantoridge, 1 I Massachusetts, 19^0. I j Hueffer, Ford Madox. Ancient Lights and Certain New Reflections, j London, 1911. __________________ . Memories and Impressions: A Study in Atmospheres. ! j New York and London, 1911. | . "Joseph Conrad," English Review, X (December 1911), 66-83. j__________________ . Joseph Conrad: A Personal Remembrance. 1 Boston, 1925. I__________________ . Mightier than the Sword: Memories and Criticisms. London, 1938. j__________________ . Return to Yesterday. New York, 1932. "Thus to Revisit," English Review, XXXI (July | 1920), 5-13- ' \ Huneker, James Gibbons. "The Genius of Joseph Conrad," North American I Review, CC (August 191*0, 270-79- _____________________. The Intimate Letters of James Gibbons Huneker, I ed. Josephine Huneker. New York, 1938. _____________________. "A Letter to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. I 300 Huneker, James Gibbons, The Letters of James Gibbons Huneker, ed. Josephine Huneker. New York, 1922. James, Henry, The Letters of Henry James, ed. Percy Lubbock, 2 vols. New York, 1920. • Notes on Novelis-bs, with Some Other Notes. New York, _ - j - ____________. "Three Letters to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. Jean-Aubry, Georges. Introduction to Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad. ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. . Joseph Conrad: Life and Letters. 2 vols. New York,'1927. ! "Joseph Conrad," Book Buyer, XVI (June 1898), 389-90. , Bookman. XXXVII (August 1913), 59^. i , Bookman (London), XX (September 1901), 173. I , Current Literature. XXX (February 1901), 222. i "Joseph Conrad: A Unique Writer of tbe Sea," Current Literature, XLII j (January 1907), 58-59. j "Joseph Conrad's Home," Bookman, XIX (July I90I+), ^9-50. Kipling, Kudyard. "A Letter to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. .Lawrence, David Herbert. The Letters of D. H. Lawrence, ed. Aldous ; Huxley. New York, 1932. I ."Literary Miscellany," Literary News, N. S., XXIII (May 1902), 156. I | !Little, James Stanley. Beview of An Outcast of the Islands, Academy, j I XLIX (June 27, 1896), 525. Lucas, Edward Verral. The Colvins and Their Friends. New York, 1928. ! ___________________ . "A Letter to Joseph Conrad," In Twenty Letters 1 to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926, I _______ . Beading, Writing, and Bemembering: A Literary Becord. London, 1932. 301 MacArthur, James. Beview of Almayer^ Folly. Bookman. II (August 1895), 39-U. McCarthy, Desmond. Beview of The Secret Agent. Albany Beview (London), II (November 1907), 229-3^• Macy, John Albert. "Joseph Conrad," Atlantic Monthly. XCVIII (November 1906), 697-702. Marrot, H. V. The Life and Letters of John Galsworthy. New York, 1936. Masefield, John. Beview of Youth. Speaker. N« S., VII (January 31/- j 1903), 1*2. Mather, F. J., Jr. Beview of Typhoon. Forum. XXXIV (January 1903)>"' 400-402. Mencken, H. L. "Conrad." In A Book of Prefaces. New York, 1917* Middleton, George. Beview of The Nigger of the Narcissus, Bookman, XXXIX (July 191*0, 563-65. | iNoble, James Ashcroft. Beview of Almayer*s Folly, Academy, XLVII 1 (June 15, 1895), 502. "Notes on Conrad," Bookman, XXXVIII (December 1913), 352-5^• 1 | jPayn, James. Beview of The Nigger of the "Narcissus," Illustrated London News (February 1898), p. 8. 1 Payne, William Morton. Beview of The Children of the Sea, Dial, XXV (August 1, I898), 78. . Beview of Nostromo. Dial, XXXVIII (February 16, 1905), 126. ( ^ ____________ . Beview of Bomance, Dial, XXXVII (July 16, 1 9 0 i ^ 3 7 . , 1 1 . Beview of Victory, Dial, LVIII (May 13, 1915), 3 1 | "The Personality of Conrad," Academy, LXVI (February 20, 1904), 198. 1 j |Quiller-Couch, Arthur T. Beview of The Nigger of the "Narcissus," Pall Mall Magazine, XIV (March 1698), 428-29. ! . Beview of Typhoon and Other Stories, = Bookman (London). XXIV (June 1903), 108. Beview of Alma.yer1 s Folly, Athenaeum (May 25, 1895), P't. 1, P« 671. j 302 Beview of Almayer«s Folly. Book Buyer. XII (July 1895), 353. . Bookman (London), VIII (September 1895), , Critic, N. S., XXV (May 9, 1896), 335. , Literary World, XXVI (May 18, 1895), 155. , Nation, XVI (October 17, 1895), 278. , Saturday. Review. LXXIX (June 15, 1895), 797. _________________________, Speaker. XI (July 29, 1895), 722-23.’ ________________________ , Spectator, LXXV (October 19, 1895), 530. Review of Chance, Academy. LXXXVI (January 31, 1914), 145-46. 191*0, 9 -rt-iiiiW jL J L O O . il I vI V /X I J A C V l c W VJ.L I v c V l c W b 9 A J j X A 373-74. > Athenaeum (January 17, 191*0. pt. 1. pp. 88-89. 1 .....9 Atlantic Monthly. CCXIV (October 1914). *530. 9 Independent. LXXVIII (April 27. 1914)r 173. j 9 Literary Digest, XLVIII (May 9, 1914). 1119. t Outlook. CVII (May 2. 1914). 45-46. » Saturday Review. CXVII (January 24. 1914). 117-18. Spectator. CXII (January 17. 1914). 101-102. Review of The Children of the Sea, Bookman, VIII (October 1898)f 91. , Critic, N. S.. XIX (May lb. 1898). 328. , Literary News, N. S., XIX (May 1898), I52. , Literary World, XXXIX (June 11, 1898), I87. , Nation, LXVII (July 21, 1898). 53. , New York limes Supplement (May 21, 1898), p. 344. 303 I I Review of Falk, New York Times Supplement (October 2k, 1903), p. 756, _, New York Tribune Supplement (September 27, 1903), ip. 11-12. Review of The Inheritors. Academy, IXI (August 3, 1901), 93. I _____________________ Athenaeum (August 3, 1901), pt. 2, pp. 151-52J i _______________________, Critic. N. S., XXXIX (September 1901), 277. ___________________ , Independent. LIII (October 26, 1901), 597. , New York Times Supplement (July 13, 19#1), ■ ' - ‘ _______________________, Saturday Review, XLII (September 28, 1901), 907. ; _______________________ , Spectator, IXXVII (July 13, 1901), 6l. I I Review of Lord Jim, Academy. LIX (November 10, 1900), 4U3. I 1 , Athenaeum (November 3, 1900^ pt. 2, p. 516. I , Bookman. XIII (April 1901), 187. j , Critic. N. S., XXXVIII (May 1901), i)-37-38. j |_________________ , New York Tribune Supplement (November 3# 1900), p. 10. _________________ , Outlook. LXVI (November 17, 1900), 711. i______________________ , Speaker. N. S., Ill (November 2k, 1900), 215-16. _________________ , Spectator. LXXXV (November 2k, 1900), 753. J Review of The Mirror of the Sea, Academy, LXXI (October 20, 1906), 393*: ! Athenaeum (October 27, 1906), pt. 2, ^ * , Literary Digest, XXXIII (November 10, j _____________________________ , Nation, LXXXIII (November 1, 1906), | - j - . . , , New York Times Supplement (November 1 0 , , 304 Review of The Mirror of the Sea., Outlook, LXXXIV (November 17, 1906), 678- 79. , Spectator, XCVII (December 1, 1906), g - — — . Review of The Nigger of the "Narcissus,” Academy, LIII (January 1, 1898), 1-2. 1898), 163. j 1 ju i. x x o u j . ucLL .y i , Bookman (London), XIII (January 1898), 131. , Illustrated London News, XCII (January 8, 1898), 50. , Literature, II (March 26, 1698), 354. , Speaker, XVII (January 15, 1898), 83-84. / , Spectator, LXXIX (December 25 1897), 9*1-0. Review of Nostromo, Athenaeum (November 5, 190*0, pt. 2, p. 619. j , Atlantic Monthly, CVII (January 1906), *4-5-46. I _________________ , Bookman (London), XXVII (February 1905), 221. _________________ , Independent, LVIII (March 9, 1905), 557-58. I , New York Times Supplement (December 31, 190*0, , p. 9*i4. j__________________, Reader, V (April 1905), 618-I9. I i I__________________, Spectator. XCIII (November 19, 1904),, 800-801. ! i 'Review of An Outcast of the Islands. Athenaeum (July 18, 1898), pt. 2, ' p. 91. ! _________ , Book Buyer, XIII (October 1896), , 537.38. __________________________________, Bookman, IV (October 1896), 166. 305 Review of An Outcast of the Islands, Bookman (London), LIV (May 1896), > 1. _______________________________, Guardian (June 10, 1896), p. 906. t Literary Hews, N. 8. XVII (October 1896), 307- _________________________, Nation, LXIV (April 15, 1897), 287. __________________ } National Observer, XIV (April 18, ______ , New York Times (September 23, 1896), p. 3 7 6 p t & _______ , Speaker, XIII (April 4, 1896), — g . . i ; ' ; , Spectator, LXXVI (May 30, 1896), , j 7T8‘ | Review of A Personal Record, Catholic World, XCV (May 1912), 254-56. | _, Dial, LII (March 1, 1912), 1?2. j , Independent, LXXII (March 28, 1912), 678. | ________________________, Nation. XCIV (March 7, 1912), 238-39. 1 , New York Times (February 1:8, 1912), ! PP. 77-78. ! ! , North American Review, CXCV (April 1912), j 569-70. Review of The Point of Honor. Dial. XLVI (April 16, 1909), 263. { ! f independent♦ XLV (November 5, 1908), I 1066. ' ' I , Nation, IXXXVII (October 15, 1908), 364. ! i . | .Review of Romance, Academy, LXV (October 31, 1903), 469. ________________ , Athenaeum (November 7, 1903), pt. 2, p. 610. : ________________ , Bookman, XIX (August 1904), 5^* 306 Beview of Romance, Illustrated London News, CIII (November 7, 1903). 688. ____ , New York Times Supplement (May l4, 1904), p. 325* ________________ , Outlook. LXXVII (June 18, 1904), 4-24-25. Beview of The Secret Agent, Athenaeum (September 28, 1907), pt. 2, pp. 361-62. ___________ , Current Literature. XLIV (February 1908), 223-24". 105-106. 1907), p. 562. 370. _, Dial. XLIII (October 16, 1907)., 252. , Independent. XLIV (January 9, 1908), .> Nation. LXXXV (September 26, 1907), 285. New York Times Supplement (September 21, Outlook. LXXX7TI (October 12, 1907), 309. Putnam’s Magazine. Ill (December 1907), .> Spectator. XCIX (September 21, 1907), 400-401. Beview of A Set of Six, Athenaeum (August 29, 1908), pt. 2, p. 237* ____________ , Bookman (London), XXXV (October 1908), 39. _____________________ , Catholic World. C (March I915), 825. _____________________ , Nation.C (February 18, 1915), 199. ■ , Spectator, Cl (August 15, 1908), 237* _________________, New York Times (January 31, 1915), p. 38. Beview of Some Beminiscences. Athenaeum (February 3, 1912), pt. 1, p. 124T ___________________________ . Bookman (London), LII (April 1912), 27. ____________________________ , Spectator. CIX (July 13, 1912), 60-61. 307] Beview of Tales of Unrest, Academy, LVI (January l4, 1899), 66-67. f American Monthly Review of Reviews, XVIII (December I898), 729- 9 Athenaeum (April 30, 1898), pt. 1, p. 564. 9 Chatauquan, XXVII (July 1898), 428. 9 Critic, N. S., XXXIX (May 14, 1898), 328. 9 Literary World, XXIX (June 25, 1898), 204. 9 literature, II (April 30, 1898), 507-508. 9 Spectator, LXXX.I (August 13, 1898), 219. Review of TTwixt Land and Sea, American Monthly Beview of Reviews, XLVII (June 1913), 762-63. , Athenaeum (October 19, 1912), pt. 2, p. , Bookman, XXXVII (March 1913), 85. , Bookman (London), XLIII (December 1912), * c — CO H , Independent, LXXIV (March 6, 1913), 538-39. , Nation, XCVI (April'10, 1913), 360-61. , Outlook, GIII (March 15, 1913), 596. , Saturday Beview, CXIV (October 19, 1912), 492-93 • , Spectator, CIX (November 16, 1912), 815-16. Beview of Typhoon, Harper's Weekly, (October 4, 1912), pp. 1412-13. > Reader, I (December 1902), 101-102. » New York Times Supplement (September 20, 1902), p. 626. » New York Tribune Supplement (September 14, 1902), p. 12. ' 308 Review of Typhoon and Other Stories. Academy and Literature, LXVT (May 9/ 1903), 463-64. _______ , Athenaeum (May 2, 1903), pt. 2, PP. 558-59. Review of Under Western Eyes. Athenaeum (October 21, 1911), pt. 2, pp. 483-84. , Current Literature. LII (February 1912), 236-374 ~ _________ , New York Times Supplement (December 10, 1911), p. 818. _________ , North American Review, CXCIV (December 1911), 935-36. , Saturday Review. CXII (October 14, 1911), 495. Review of Victory, American Monthly Review of Reviews. LI (June 1915), 761. ____________ , Athenaeum (September 25, 1915), pt. 2, p. 208. _______________ , Atlantic Monthly, CXVI (October 1915), 5H. I ,________________, Bookman (London), CXCIX (October 1915), 21. ________________ , Literary Digest. L (April 17, 1915), 885. ________________ , Nation. C (April 15, 1915), 416-17. ___________, New York Times (March 28, 1915), p. 109. !________________, Outlook. CX (May 5, 1915), 44. j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , Saturday Review. CXX (September 25, 1915), 298. 1 ! Review of Youth, Athenaeum (December 20, 1920), pt. 2, p. 824. 1 j , Independent, LV (April 2, 1903), 801-802. . _, Literary News. N. S., XXIV (April 1903), 106-107. ______________ , Nation. LXXVI (June 11, 1903), 478. ______________ , New York Times Supplement (April 4, 1903), p. 224. ______________ , New York Tribune Supplement (September 38,1898), p. 12. 309 Beview of* Youth, Reader, I (May 1903), 561-62. Reynolds, M. E., Memories of John Galsworthy. New York, n. d. Reynolds, Stephen, "Joseph Conrad and Sea Fiction," Quarterly Review, CXVII (July 1912), 159-80. ^Robertson, J. 1 5 J William Ernest Henley. London, 19^9. Written under the pseudonym "John Connell^/ Sprigge, S. Squire. Review of The Secret Agent, A cadency, LXXIV \ (February 1, 1898), 1)03-15. ! I Sullivan, T. R. Review of The Children of The Sea, Book Buyer, XVI | (May 1898), 350-52. j Symons, Arthur. "Conrad," Forum, LIII (May 1915)> 579-93* j _____________. "D’Annunzio in English,” Saturday Review, LXXV ; (January 29, 1898), lb^>-b6. Van Westrum, A. Schade. Review of Lord Jim, Book Buyer, XXII (February 1901), 63. I ■ Vorse, M. H. "A Writer Who Knows the Sea," Critic, N. S., XLIII I (September 1903), 280. j l j 1 I Wells, H. G. Experiments in Autobiography: Discoveries and Conclusions : j of a Very Ordinary Brain (Since 1806). New York, 193^♦ - ' . Note on An Outcast of the Islands, Academy, LI (January 16, 159777 77* . Beview of An Outcast of the Islands, Saturday Review, ; LXXXI (May 16, 1896), 509-510. 1___________. "Two Letters to Joseph Conrad." In Twenty Letters to Joseph Conrad, ed. Georges Jean-Aubry. London, 1926. West, Geoffrey. H. G. Wells. New York, 1930. ! ! <White, Stewart Edward. Review of The Secret Agent, Bookman, XXVI ; (January 1908), 531-32. 1 1 !Wise, Thomas J. A Bibliography of the Writings of Joseph Conrad, 1895-1920. London, 1920. Pnlverslty of Southern California

Linked assets