On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    " But in all other animals and plants , an internal morphological differentiation precedes or accompanies the external , and the homogeneous germ becomes separated into a certain central portion , which we have called the endoplast , and a peripheral portion , the periplast . Inasmuch as the separate existence of the former necessarily implies a cavity , in which it lieg , the germ in this state constitutes a vesicle witli a central particle , or a ' nucleated cell . ' , " There is no evidence whatever that the molecular forces of the living matter ( the kvis essentialis' of Wolfi ^ or the vital forces of the moderns ) are by this act of differentiation localized in the endoplast , to the exclusion of the periplast , or vice versd . Neither is there any evidence that any attraction or other influence is exercised by the one over the other ; the changes which each subsequently undergoes , though they are in harmony , having no causal connexion with one another , but each proceeding , as it would seem , in accordance with the general determining laws of the organism . On the other hand , the ' vis essentialis ' appears to have essentially different and independent ends in view—if we may for the nonce speak metaphorically—in thus separating the endoplast from the periplast .

    " The endoplast grows and divides ; but , except in a few more or less doubtful cases , it would seem to undergo no other morphological change . It frequently disappears altogether ; but as a rule , it undergoes neither chemical nor moiphological metamorphosis . So far from being the centre of activity of the vital actions , it would appear much rather to be the less important histological element . * ' * ' The periplast , on the other hand , which has hitherto passed under the names of cell-wall , contents , and intercellular substance , is the subject of all the .. most important metamorphic processes , whether morphological or chemical , in the animal and in the plant . By its differentiation , every variety of tissue is produced ; and this differentiation is the result not of any matabolic action of the endoplast , which has frequently disappeared before the metamorphosis begins , but of intimate molecular changes in its substance , which take place under the guidance of the ' vis essentialis , ' , to use a strictly positive phrase , occur in a definite order , we know not why .

    " The metamorphoses of the periplastic substance are twofold—chemical and structural . The former maybe of the nature either of conversion : change of cellulose into xylogen , intercellular substance , &c ., of the indifferent tissue of embryos into collagen , chondrin , &c . ; or of deposit : as of silica in plants , of calcareous salts in animals . "The structural metamorphoses , again , are Of two kinds—vacuolation , or the formation of cavities ; as in the intercellular passages of plants , the first vascular canals of animals ; and fibrillation , or the development of . a tendency to break up in certain definite lines rather than in others , a peculiar modification of the cohesive forces of the tissue , such as we have in connective tissue , in muscle , and in the ' secondary deposits' of the vegetable cell . " .

    These views are illustrated in detail ; and no student of the cell theory should omit to give the paper his serious attention . We do not think Mr . Huxley makes out all his positions , but we thank him heartily for this contribution to structural jmatoiny .

    Untitled Article

    THE REWARDS OF LITERATURE . Hope : a Story of Chequered Life . By Alfred W . Cole , Eaq . author of Cape and the Kaffirs , &c . " 3 vols . Price 11 . Us . 6 d . T . C . Newby . The name of Alfred Cole is familiar enough to the readers of magazines affixed to many a lively bit of prose and verse , and it now figures on the title page of a novel in three volumes , courting criticism . If the reader bring with him a circulating library standard , he will find much to be pleased with in Hope ; we warn him to expect nothing measurable by higher standards . It is a story of love and adversity , not new , by any means ; not very probable in its details , but readable—that first of all qualities in a novel . Frank Nugent is the son of a wealthy banker , who blows out his brains in the first chapter , on finding himself a bankrupt ; thus leaving Frank in that ( for a novelist ) most desirable condition ,

    " penniless , and an orphan . " If your hero has not the wealth and accomplishments of Monte Christo , you must make him a beggar , Frank , instead of doing what sons of wealthy bankers do in real life , prefers the invariable course of orphans in fiction—advertises in the newspapers , receives no answer for some time , an insulting one afterwards , and finally , just as starvation is approaching , gets a temporary rescue—becomes " teacher" to the children of a vulgar woman , in whoso house we arc introduced to some low-life scenes . Frank " takes to literature , " as it is called ; writes for the periodicals ; meets with old friends , who introduce him once more into " society ; " and so the story alternates between chandehcrs and " short fours , " varied by perils , troubles , and adventures of the approved kind . There is a Flora Danvers , whom you recognise at once as the wife of Frank Nugent—after a three-volume probation ; and a Captain Dashwood , wliom you detect to bo " the military villain ; " and there is a David Tonka , meant for a character , and illustrating the " pennya-liners . " b

    "Love and Literature" the book might have been called . " Love , " because it is ji novel , and must have that element , or remain unread ; Literature , " because it is the author ' s profession , and nearest his heart . ¦ As a specimen of tho st y lo , and the author ' s opinions , wo will quote this fragment of a conversation very undramatically placed in tho mouths of two women , in a " lovo confidence . "

    ti t THE UKWABDB OF LITICJiATTTKK . ' 'But is literature ho ill paid V asked Mora . ' I havo heard that disputed ; ana I think ono of our greatest living write ™ denied it emphatically . ' You are right , " waH tho reply ; 'but in ho altogether a fair judge ? Would you take a biHhop'n opinion of tho mifficioncy of the olorgy'n remuneration ? Would you conmder a Lord Chancellor an impartial judge in tho caso of tho »> ar ? ( 3 rant « iat Huch men have attained to their' poHitionn by their own hi tf h talents alone , and that they have earned splendid rewanln moHt juntly , atill the quoHtion reinaiiiH , luutlworklllmombora of tho

    hi fV ' ' ff namo proftsHsioiiH , with Iohh talonfc , but with "ineient to render thorn of the greateflt Horvieo to tho world , well paid or ill paid ? ° «»« working clorgy rocoivo a fair remuneration for their labourH ? AhIc them , in Miar . 1 01 r »« Hwoi / aml not that of tho bench of binhopn . Do tho Htnigglhig win r " ii i lMU ' ' ° h : tVi ) nmd iliW V ly itud f <> "K'it hard to nuiHtor thoir profes-»* nwoll , dothuyoama iiur HubfUHtonco ? And do tho men who entertain uh iTm i J T ' " nM ) Ilfcl 1 1 > y month » in P » l >«> n » and poriodioalH , tho uion who } :. ?• e ; lucJlfclo >» ' ^ wo *" . th « ramlta of long an < l oarnent labour , tho writorA of tlim ! i' ! ° HO WOlkH ch ; ( inlllto « xt « " «« v « ly throughout tho libraries of tho kingdom , 2 r ° - > S <> wxt « lwi r oly slri I to ni * V , ' luun 0 H ft »« l «»<> namoH of their author * ^ wuiuur in our mouthH uh houuehoW worUa / do theoo mon—can thorn *

    inon" ' Then literature is no worse than the rest , and literary men have no more cause for complaint than men of other professions , so it seems to me , ' said Flora 'Am I right ?' " ' Not exactly , I think , and for this reason . It seems to me that literature should be better paid than any other profession , because it requires a higher class of intellect . If early any man , of the most ordinary abilities , can with proper study pass the examinations necessary to fit him for ordination into the church . The veriest boobies are ' crammed , ' as it is called , sufficiently to send them . through the Apothecaries' Hall examinations . For admission to the bar , there ia

    earn the subsistence of gentlemen with a fair chance of provision for sickness , old age , and the other ills that flesh is heir to ? I fear not , Flora . Even the greatest novelist we have had , not judging selfishly because his own earnings have been in proportion to his own high merits , but thinking of the cases of his less gifted and less fortunate brethren , proclaimed that ' Literature was a . good walking-stick , but a bad crutch . ' The age of-Hogarth s starving poet in the garret may have passed ; but the age in which Leigh Hunt was left dependent on a pension , and Moore the same , —in which Hood died in poverty , and Laman Blanchard almost in want , —is surely not the one in which one or two brilliant exceptions can complacently affirm that literature is well paid . ' " ' Are not the general masses in all professions ill paid , then 1 asked Flora ; * for instance , the church and the bar ; and I suppose medicine is no better . ' ¦ " < I believe that all professions are ill paid , as far as the great body of those who follow them is concerned , ' replied Mrs . St . Leger ,

    no examination at all . Thus , any man may become a member of either of those professions—divinity , physic , or law—if he chooses to undergo the prescribed ordeal . But is it so with literature ? Can a man resolve to be a literary man , aa he would undertake any other profession ? Can he by any length of study , or any ordeal in the "world , fit himself to be an author ? Not unless a certain amount of talent belong to him ; talent which , even in mediocre authors , is infinitely greater than in nine-tenths of the members of the other professions I have instanced . If the requisites , the mental requirements ^ of an author he greater and rarer than those of other men , surely his remuneration should be proportionately higher . '

    " 'In strict justice it seems so , ' replied Flora ; 'hut how is it to be accomplished ? If an author's works do not , by their sale , remunerate him , how are we to devise the means of recompensing him ?' " ' True ; there are no means of doing so . But at least one thing may be done , and it is in the power of all to aid in it . If we cannot remunerate literature , we can , at least , honour it . Yet to this day , Flora , it is a matter of deliberation in some quarters whether an author is , as such , a gentleman ; though if he have eaten dinners in the Temple , and be a barrister-at-law , the question is at rest directly .

    Let literature be honoured ; let society pronounce it the highest of professions , or above all professions , and authors will have some consolation for their poverty , even if their poverty be not actually diminished through the exaltation of their rank . At the present moment , an author who is known to be the favoured and honoured guest of the great and noble , is ten times more eagerly read than one of equal mental calibre , whose place in society is unknown . If you doubt my word , ask at your circulating library , and be assured of the fact . ' " 'I do not doubt it , ' said Flora ; ' it is consistent with what Carlyle calls the ' Flunkeyism' of the age we live in . ' "

    We cannot let this pass without a protest . The passage very fairly represents the opinions of a numerous class of writers ; the same things have been repeatedly said before ; hut with all our professional amour propre we cannot admit what seems to us an unwise , because unnecessary , exaggeration respecting the superiority of intellect displayed in Literature . We do not think the intellect so great as writers assume it to be ; and we think the question of comparative reward placed on a false footing . To write anything readable requires a certain talent ; to write even the old stories which delight the readers of inferior periodicals , requires a special talent , small , perhaps , yet special , since many a wise and able man will be found perfectly incompetent to write such things . But in crediting a special talent we do not assign its value . The wise and able man in

    whom it is deficient will not lose one iota of our respect ; possessing it , he would possess a talent the more ; wanting it , we arc not conscious of tho loss ; he is equally unable to danco on the tight-rope , or to rival Charles Kean in Sardaiiapalus . When , therefore , it is said that " authors have infinitely greater talent" than the members of otlior professions , an absurdity is uttered ; the talent is different , not greater , not we believe so great . If , when you speak of authors , you think onl y of the great names , and mentally compare them with the average professional mind , of course the superiority is sufficiently obvious ; but , obeying the conditions of tho argument , and keeping in view the mass of writers—tho compilers , drudges , annotators , journalists , novelists , dramatists , philosophers—wo cannot say that experience justifies us for ono moment in . proclaiming their The

    superiority . Lawyer , Surgeon , and Physician display moro intellect in tho exercise of their profession , than docs tho average man of letters in his . If tho majority of professional men consist of men routiniary and not wise , will any ono pretend that the majority of writers can boast of being wise and not routiniary P How few men of letters think at all ! How few think with originality and success ! How few do the thing they pretend to do ! Literary talent is , strictly speaking , tho talent ot expression ; it is frequontly tho whole budget of an ' author . Without for a moment ignoring or undervaluing tho pleasures and tho uses of such a talont , we cannot , in sober seriousness , declare that its possession implies greater intellectual calibre than ia implied in the successful exercise of tho other professions .

    If it bo granted , as on a dispassionate survey it musU > e , that , comparing Literature with tho other Professions , there is no superiority of intellectual power and variety to bo assumed as implied m tho former , wo then come to tho second question of " reward . ' It is a vory delicate question . Probably no man thinks ho is duly rewarded . Hut tho reward being ultimately a purely' commercial transaction , we must all of ub submit to tho " conditions of tho market . " HaggH , who writes metaphysical profundities , and JJrown who publishes volumes of verse , naturally complain of an ago which will spend money on trash , when their works arc unsold ; and they ask , Should not groat I ' ntolloot bo rewarded P Forgetting that they demand a pecuniary reward for a product not estimated in pecuniary value . To " underpaid" novelists , dramatists , &c . wo should say . Either ono of two thingrt : Tho paying public is but moderately eager to road your works ; or oIho tho talent you possess , undoniablo though it ho , is possessed by many rvials j if Jenny Linds were as abundant aa authors they would bo paid as ill . "

    Untitled Article

    November 5 , 1853 . ] THE LEADER . 1075

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Nov. 5, 1853, page 1075, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2011/page/19/