THE "SATURDAY" AND THE "ACADEMY"

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 86, 4 January 1908, Page 13

THE "SATURDAY" AND THE "ACADEMY"

"It is not'easy for foreigners," wrote Mr. Andrew Lang in one of his recent budgets of London literary _ gossip in tho New York "Post," "to estimate the influence of this or that literary periodical ill art alien laud." Hp had. been reading' an article "As oui cousins behold us" in the "North American Review," in tho cfmrse of which it was alleged that tho English peoplo "secretly cherish" "the famous 'Saturday Review.' " Upon this point Mr. Lang has tho following interesting comments

Tho "Saturday Review," as.far as ,1 am ftwa'r,o, hag loiig ago ceased to bo "famous." 1 never read it, and do not. know What spirit it expresses; I have not seen a copy of it ; in any. house for many years. .. This may be ii mere accident, or tho "oh'orishing" was the "Saturday Review" began-to droop its wing after a ton years' flight, and, about 1868, ;vas correctly described by n popular critic as "a liltlo hot so much read as it nsod In be." Its "famq" was acquired iii 1856-1866, or thereabouts; and, wliiio I was a contributor, about .1875-1800, its decline ill influence was only too conspicuous— perhaps that was by my fault. 1 do not know that it was worse written than it had been in its prime, bufc"'tho gambol had been shown," and no longer amused tho public, l'erhaps the paper was too scholarly for a now generation; but tho now generation saidi that it was too dull, and the political tone was disliked. : Finally the family of ibo founder parted with tho paper; tho old stall was scattered, ai)d tho "Spectator," I befievq, flourished in .its turn. As has been remarked, I do not seo the "Saturday Rcviow" in the houses where, of old, it was a welcome guest; and concerning its qualities and opinions I can offer no criticism, as 1 know nothing. Still, I do not tliinl; that it can bo rogarded as typical of Uritish opinion, or of any large scotiou of liritish society. Of old it mainly represented some kinds of Oxford men, and perhaps thoso who wore known as "The Trinity Sniffers," ancl a section of the High Church party; and Professor Freeman, and tho.-e who disliked Uickous. I>'amou3, for a while the "Saturday" was, but it never was, or wished to Uo, popular.

In tho same way, when tho editor of the "North American Review" calls the "Academy" "a well-known and representative literary periodical," I cannot agreo with him. The "Academy" arose, early in tho seventies, with a design to bo a much more severe mid erudite "Athenaeum"; it was then published by Mr. Murray. It was nover a success, never "caught on"; and was not more popular than that austere and valuable organ of tho learned "La Revue Critique."

Illr. Murray dropped the "Academy"; I forget who toolc it tip, and after long services to persons interested in tho Ilitfcites and other scvoro topics dear to me, a series of eflorts to mako tho "Academy" popular appear to have proved unsuccessful. At one time it was amusing, by dint of its misprints, culminating when it could not spell its own name, and called itself tlio "Acniliimy," or, at least, spelled "academy" "acadamy."

In tho spring of tlio present year the paper again changed bands; showed much regrotful interest in tho lato author of "Lady Windermere's Fan," and. began to publish articles impinging on religious, educational, and social questions, charging strongly against Nonconformists and the "bourgeoisie." I do not think the paper can bo stylod "well known" ; a glance at its advertisements floes not cncourago the belief that it is popular; and, if it is representative, it represents a peculiar school of literary people and of religious persons.