THE SKETCH BOOK.*

WHEN Launcelot Langstaff, Will Wizard, and Anthony Evergreen first appeared before the public, they made known that "they should not puzzle their heads to give an account of themselves, for two reasons; first, because it was nobody's business; secondly, because, if it were, they did not hold themselves bound to attend to any body's business but their own "; and the most that could be gotten from them was, “There are three of us, Bardolph, Peto, and I.” This cavalier air, together with the mystery, and the bold declaration, "We care not what the public think of us," put the public upon guessing and thinking about them and little else.

Whether it was the sagacity of the people, or that eagerness to be found out which we see in little children at hide-and-seek, which discovered them, we cannot tell; but it was not long before the authors of Salmagundi were as well known as their writings. Probably the secrecy was a mere matter of sport, and after it had served its turn, they cared little whether they were known or not. It is now well understood

*From the North American Review for 1819.

The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent. Nos. I. and II. New York: C. P. Van Winkle.

1819.

who the gentlemen were, and that Mr. Washington Irving was the principal contributor to the work. Knickerbocker, which was published not long after, was written wholly by him, as are also the numbers of the Sketch Book which have just appeared.

Though the surest way of judging of a man's talents is from his writings, it is a very uncertain one by which to form an opinion of his moral character. Yet we have as little doubt about the good principles and kindheartedness of the author before us, merely from reading his works, as we could have, had we known him for years. The interest which he makes us feel in him personally is one reason why we now go back to his early productions. Another reason is, that we like the leading papers of Salmagundi, and the greater part of Knickerbocker, quite as well as the Sketch Book. Besides, we have all along intended to notice such American works, whether late or early ones, as may add to the reputation of our literary character.

In doing this, we hope to be free from any disposition to sneer at a book because written while our literary reputation is so low. On the other hand, we shall not care to flatter the vanity of those who think to raise themselves and the country to a high rank in authorship through much and earnest talking about it. We shall examine a work without any home feelings; our only business is with its merits and faults. We have many times forborne making amusement for ourselves and our readers from the trashy works which are daily turned out, as there is little danger of their doing much harm. When one considers how pleasant and easy a thing it is to sport with the follies and vanity of our neighbours, we may be allowed to take some credit to ourselves for this self-denial, especially when it is

known that we are now lying under the displeasure of a multitude of authors for this very silence, which is all from our good-will towards them and regard for our country.

Though there has been much abuse abroad of our literary character, and too little allowed to circumstances, yet that abuse is rather in the spirit in which facts have been stated than in a falsifying of the facts thernselves. Would we give our anger time to cool, place ourselves in the situation of England, consider the number of men of learning and genius who have risen, clustering like stars, to be her light and glory since we became a nation, and then look over our own land at the few dim, blinking lights, with only here and there one of steady and bright blaze, so distant that "fire answers not fire," we should allow something to the sound of triumph and rejoicing, which is heard from the midst of her splendour, and we should be moved with the spirit of forgiveness if we considered what would be our language of boasting were our situation hers.

Without any regard to this, we at once become exceeding angry, - begin to talk in large and general terms of American genius and enterprise, forgetting that first-rate authors are not as easily made as prime sailors and soldiers. We do not stop to ask ourselves whether this universal talent for action in our country may not be inconsistent with that abstract, ideal, and reflective cast of mind, which marks those whose lives appear to be unmixed thought, whose intellectual being seems kindled, and whose passions work strongest in worlds of their own creating. In the eagerness of defence, we urge the necessary employment of the talents of a young country upon the gainful and useful; and looking forward to the time when we shall no

longer be rovers through wild regions, but settled down quietly, and full of wealth, we speak of that as the period when we shall have our host of scientific men, great scholars and poets, moralists and novelists, to be our boast and delight. But if the English superciliously tell us that they can furnish us with intellectual nourishment till these ends are accomplished, we forget the very argument we were using as a reason for our deficiency, and deny our need of their aid,— run over our small list of writers, good, bad, and indifferent, and make up with long and heated declamation for what is wanting.

Some have been so far gone in their zeal, as to utter a cry of affected mourning over the decay of learning and genius in Europe, and with that happy talent of making the future present, so common to us, and which has been scoffingly called our "figure of anticipation," have congratulated our country upon having become the home of the intellectual greatness of man; while others hold a lamentation over the thraldom of mind in England, and talk of our letting it out from its dark, close prison-house.

We should be happy to learn of these men what there may be in religion, politics, the sciences, and literature, which has not been discussed by her authors often and freely. In political and religious freedom, we may have put in practice what they have taught, but they have left us little in the leading principles of these to discover.

A short time ago, when the world was talking of discoveries in politics as familiarly as of discoveries in geography, it was curious to look into the older writers of Europe, and see with how many of these new-found wonders they were acquainted. Society at large may

have gone forward rapidly, but great minds have always reasoned and felt very much as they do now. And granting that their vigour of thought was sometimes turned from its right action by the prejudices and superstition of the age, still they have been our instructers in much wherein we have fancied ourselves self-taught. At any rate, we cannot as yet believe, that, because the people of England are living under old institutions, they are so enslaved in body or mind as to stand in need of our pity. We think that it will be time enough for us to give utterance to our mixed feelings of triumph and grief, when the scholars, philosophers, and poets of America shall furnish study for one's life; when their views shall be so broad and liberal, that, in comparison, the authors of England will be dangerous to our freedom of mind, and, having been hitherto our teachers in what is moral, lofty, and pure within us, must be shunned as corrupting and degrading our natures. Indeed, it is not yet time to empty our shelves of European lumber to make way for American writers, there is still room enough for these in the vacancies left. An American library would, we fancy, be rather a sorry and heart-sickening sight to a literary man. Such notions are almost too ludicrous to be hinted at. Yet if we examine nakedly those which have so often of late been forced upon us, we shall find them the same, only curiously stuffed out and dressed up. This sort of contest deserves no better name than squabbling, and we are sorry to find men engaged in it who are fitted for better things.

The class of men abroad who affect a vulgar triumph over us, with an exception or two, are not those who add to that superiority of which they boast. Of those at home, who will not stay to consider how much there