THE WAGES OF GENIUS EAST AND WEST.

Otago Witness, Issue 2106, 5 July 1894, Page 41

THE WAGES OF GENIUS EAST AND WEST.

No nation pays it 3 artists and authors so badly as the Japanese ; though hardly any nation is so artistic, and the writing of poetry U almost as essential to a public man as it was in the days of Addison.

Not that Japanese poems are a severe strain to the composer, tor a dodoitsu generally c nsists of but 31 syllables. A Japanese P'inte*. who was also a poet, brought me a p. em which he bad written with his partner, who was also a street photographer. He translated it into English for me : " Dast of light at the back of oceau." This, I afterwards found, indicated " dawn."

To be serious, literature, according to a native paper, quoted by so Pbilo Japanese a journal as the Japan Mail, is shamefully paid ia Japan. In the old feudal days, when every kind of producer was dependent upon some pilnce or daimio, great romance writers received only from 24s to 28s per month. Things are a little batter nowaday?, but what would Mark Twain say to- these figures? The highest monthly emoluments earned by writers of fiction amount to about £15, and only two or three get this much. Moreover, this is not reached until the prime of .life has been passed, and long years of hardship and indigenoe have been endured. Next to these " rare kings of their craft " come writers still in their prime, who earn from £7 10s to £10 a month, but even these number only four or five ; while the condition of those who devote themselves to ephemeral literature is even worse. The highest sum paid to a contributor of serials to a newspaper or periodical is 9s for each instalment in a daily paper, and 153 to 27s for a single instalment in a periodical.

This rate, however, is earned only by one famous writer, and the figures go down as low a? 8d to Is a chapter, which is the price for an obscure writer in a local paper. £7 10s to £10 a month is £90 to £120 a yf ar, and even £15 a month only comes to £180 a year.

Mark Twain, who heads the list among English-speaking authors, as distinct from journalists, can get lOOOdol — £200— for any article of two or three pages he choose 3to offer to magazines like The Century, and eveiy thousand words of a story by Bret Harte is as good currency as a £20 note. Howells gets as much in America. He makes a point of never Belling anything — not 10 lines — under lOOdol, and receives a salary of 10,000dol from the Harpers.

Charles Dadley Warner had the same salary, bat threw it up, finding that he could make more money with the time, and he is hardly morj than a brilliant journalist. Frank Stockton is said to rival Howells.

The serial rights of a three-volume novel by writers like Robert Louis Stevenson and J. M. Barrie are worth n^t less than £1000 The New York Sun paid Muk Twain for the American seiial rights of the 12 articles which also appeared in an English illustrated paperl2,ooodol — £2400.

Some journalists, too, make enormous Bums in America. Howard, who write! Howard'g Weekly Letttr, syndicated all over the United States, receives for this 20,000d0l a year. George Alfred Townshend is said to mike 80,000dol, and Bill Nje, after carefully reckoning up, told two differeat editors in London that he made about 50,000d0l a year out of the 16C newspapers which he " syndicates "in America. I have heard it Ba ted by the editor of agreat London weekly that Edmund Yates received £1800 a year for bis weekly letter to New York. A fair number of English authors can command £500 for the serial rights of a three-volume novel.

Coming to steady annnal incomes, the figures are not so satisfactory. Of course, no one knows a man's actual income but himself ; but though American papers have stated that Mr Besant's literary income, for instance, is £10,000 a year, there is a consensus of opinion among the men most likely to know that very few men — perhaps two cr three or four — top £1000 in any one year ; that even Mr Kipling or Mr Barrie could not expect to do this regularly; andonejadge, second to none, doubts if any Engli-h author, out of bcoks only, realises more than £2500 a yt-ar as a regular thing. Mr Besant and Mr Rider Haggard ara credited with doing as well, year after year, as any English author. Mr Hardy must have done well with " Tess of the Darbervilles," but previous to this he is understood not to hare been " coiniDg money," though his reputation has been so immense.

Mr George Meredith is reported to have received nearly £1000 for the Btory now running in the Pall Mall Magazine. Coming to individual book?, a great deal of talk was caused by Wilkie Collins receiving £1000 for " Armadale " before it was begun or even had

a title chosen. George Eliot received £7000 for " Romola,"and the same judge, who seta the incomes of authors at the lowest estimate, thinks that she made, all told, as much as £15,000 out of on© book.

Mrs Humphry Ward's " Davii Grieve " is said to hava earned her ten, twelve, or fifteen thousand pounds ; the price Lord Bsaconsfield received for " Eadymion " has been estimated at from £10,000 to £30,000. But the book whioh has brought the largest sum is undoubtedly "The Memoirs of General Grant," published by Mark Twain's firm, which so careful a critic as Edmund Clarence Stedman states in his most important work to have earned for Mrs Grant half a million dollars.

Zola is said to make £12,000 a year. For his bookrights in France be is understood to receive 61 a copy, which would give him £4500 for "La Debacle," and £4150 for " Nana " in this way.

Before I pass to art I cannot refrain from alluding to one very curious feature of Japanese journalism. Every important Japanese paper is said to have a prison editor — Japanesa editors are constantly being fined and sent to prison or deprived of their journals. The prison editor ia not a literary perbon, though nominally the responsible editor of the whole paper. His sole function is to go to prison, and he does not draw his full salary except when he is in prison.

Passing to art, it is very curie us that, while such very weak French imitations as have been shown in the Grafton Gallery seem to find purchasers, and some of our painters who have visited Japan command from £10 to £50 for their water-colour sketches, " an immortal painter like Hokusai," as the Times calls him, lived a hand-to mouth existence, and the best Japanese painters in oils can hardly make a living at all.

The Japanese themselves eeem to care for no paintings except Kakemonos (vertical scroll paintings) by Kano and others of the great old masters. I cannot say that I have seen many Japanese oil paintings of striking merit. Most of them have been far too like coloured photographs, or those hard metallic portraits of yourself or the ship that took you to Hotgkorg, which the Chinese artisan artist will paint for from half a crown to a sovereign. Still, I have seen very dramatic pictures, such as the one in the Tokio Exhibition of a man trying to rend a python's jaws, which told its own story of who was going to win.

So it is distressing to see painters even worse off than writers. And yet I have known as much as 15,000d0l paid for a globe of rock crystal 7in or Bin in diameter.

The Japanese artist making a few shillings or pounds a months may well cast longiog eyes at his English brothers. The late Frank Holl is believed to have made as much as £30,000 one year, the late Mr Long £16,000 one year, and Millais is understood to have averaged £20,000 for some years. Between £20,000 and £30,0C0 was paid for a single picture of Meissonier's while he was alive, and its American owner was Baid to have given £22,000 for Millet's " Angelus?." Holman Hunt's " L'ght of the World " is believed to have brought him £10.000, and Burne Jones's " Briai Rose " series £12,000, though the dealer made about £10,000 more out of them.

Coming to quite recent times, Mr AlmaTad ema not so very loDg ago received £6,000 for a picture, and Mr Herkomer is credited with makiDg £10,000 or £12,000 a year. Of course, the actual prices of pictures are not easy to ascertain until they come to be resold at Christie's, unless they are bought for the Chantry Bequest, or certain great provincial galleries, such as those at Birmingham, Manchester, and Liverpool.

Even the public galleries of the colonies are credited with a munificence which was never in their power. Almost the safest way of keeping within the mark is to look at the prices paid by the Ohantrey Bequest. These are generally considerably under the market prioe where pcpular artists are concerned. Indeed, it is known that some artists are not represented because they could not afford to sacrifice the 25 or 30 per cent. The largest sums paid between 1877 and 1892 were £2200 for Mr Herkomer's "Chapter of the Ooarterhouse," £2200 for Mr Brock's bronze " A Moment of Peril," £2000 for Mr Orchardson's " Napoleon on Board the Bellerophon," £2000' for Sir Frederic Leighton's bronze 11 Athlete Struggling with a Python," £2000 for Vicat Cole's "The Port of London," £1260 for Mr Oalderon's "St. Elizabeth of Hungary," and £1200 for Mr Watts's 11 Psyche."

Here one is on firm ground. It must not be forgotten that as some of the largest literary incomes are made by established writers of eduoational works, bo some of the largest artistio isoomes are made by the painters who are most sought after by the publishers of engravings. Sir' John Gilbert is understood to be the riohest artist, but not from painting only. Mr Herkomer, Mr Tadema, and Mr Ouless are certainly among those who make the largest incomes by their brushes.

Sr Jchn Millais has received for his fulllength portraits from £2000 to £3000. Once, at any rate, the story runs, he received as much for a half or three quarter lerjgh, I forget which. A certain Victorian legislator, who was much more dis'inguished fcr the greatness "* of bb fortune than for the greatness of bis political achievements, came to Millais and said that he wanted to have his portrait painted.

The great painter was nettled by his brufqueness, and replied that he only painted public personages. " I don't care what you charge," said the colonial polinciaD, who was a very unpreprssessing-lo^kiaer person. Sir John named what he hoped was a prohibitive price.

41 Give me a pen," was the answer, and a cheque was written on the spot. Sir John painted a remarkably fine portrait-, so as not to be the Victorian's debii r, but he did not forget to give Cromwell all hss wart*. The Hon, Mr felt tbat he had dnno well. We presented his portrait to the Melbourne Pablic Gallery, where is would never have been admitted otherwise, as a work by Mtllais.— Douglas Sladen in the Graphic.