A Plea for Old Cap Collier — Reading Notes

(4 User reviews)   568
Cobb, Irvin S. (Irvin Shrewsbury), 1876-1944 Project Gutenberg 1999 Not confirmed
American wit and humor; Children's literature -- History and criticism; Dime novels -- History and criticism Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 11,113
Reading time 49 min
Text sections 2

A Plea for Old Cap Collier — Reading Notes can be approached with a clearer sense of reading commitment from its source measurements: 11,113 words, 49 min estimated reading time, and 2 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 23.5 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “American wit and humor,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Irvin S. Cobb's humorous defense of dime-novel heroes like Old Cap Collier contrasts them with the panic-inducing captain in 'The Wreck of the Hesperus' and the foolish boy on the burning deck, using exaggerated satire and colloquial Southern voice.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.4/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

This was a general rule in our town. It did not especially apply to any particular household, but it applied practically to all the households with which I was in any way familiar. It was a community where an old-fashioned brand of applied theology was most strictly applied. Heaven was a place which went unanimously Democratic every fall, because all the Republicans had gone elsewhere. Hell was a place full of red-hot coals and clinkered sinners and unbaptized babies and a smell like somebody cooking ham, with a deputy devil coming in of a morning with an asbestos napkin draped over his arm and flicking a fireproof cockroach off the table cloth and leaning across the back of Satan's chair and saying: "Good mornin', boss. How're you going to have your lost souls this mornin'--fried on one side or turned over?" Sunday was three weeks long, and longer than that if it rained. About all a fellow could do after he'd come back from Sunday school was to sit round with his feet cramped into the shoes and stockings which he never wore on week days and with the rest of him incased in starchy, uncomfortable dress-up clothes--just sit round and sit round and itch. You couldn't scratch hard either. It was sinful to scratch audibly and with good, broad, free strokes, which is the only satisfactory way to scratch. In our town they didn't spend Sunday; they kept the Sabbath, which is a very different thing.

Looking back on my juvenile years it seems to me that, generally speaking, when spanked I deserved it. But always there were two punishable things against which--being disciplined--my youthful spirit revolted with a sort of inarticulate sense of injustice. One was for violation of the Sunday code, which struck me as wrong--the code, I mean, not the violation--without knowing exactly why it was wrong; and the other, repeated times without number, was when I had been caught reading nickul libruries, erroneously referred to by our elders as dime novels.

I read them at every chance; so did every normal boy of my acquaintance. We traded lesser treasures for them; we swapped them on the basis of two old volumes for one new one; we maintained a clandestine circulating-library system which had its branch offices in every stable loft in our part of town. The more daring among us read them in school behind the shelter of an open geography propped up on the desk.

Shall you ever forget the horror of the moment when, carried away on the wings of adventure with Nick Carter or Big-Foot Wallace or Frank Reade or bully Old Cap, you forgot to flash occasional glances of cautious inquiry forward in order to make sure the teacher was where she properly should be, at her desk up in front, and read on and on until that subtle sixth sense which comes to you when a lot of people begin staring at you warned you something was amiss, and you looked up and round you and found yourself all surrounded by a ring of cruel, gloating eyes?

I say cruel advisedly, because up to a certain age children are naturally more cruel than tigers. Civilization has provided them with tools, as it were, for practicing cruelty, whereas the tiger must rely only on his teeth and his bare claws. So you looked round, feeling that the shadow of an impending doom encompassed you, and then you realized that for no telling how long the teacher had been standing just behind you, reading over your shoulder.

And at home were you caught in the act of reading them, or--what from the parental standpoint was almost as bad--in the act of harboring them? I was. Housecleaning times, when they found them hidden under furniture or tucked away on the back shelves of pantry closets, I was paddled until I had the feelings of a slice of hot, buttered toast somewhat scorched on the under side. And each time, having been paddled, I was admonished that boys who read dime novels--only they weren't dime novels at all but cost uniformly five cents a copy--always came to a bad end, growing up to be criminals or Republicans or something equally abhorrent. And I was urged to read books which would help me to shape my career in a proper course. Such books were put into my hands, and I loathed them. I know now why when I grew up my gorge rose and my appetite turned against so-called classics. Their style was so much like the style of the books which older people wanted me to read when I was in my early teens.

Such were the specious statements advanced by the oldsters. And we had no reply for their argument, or if we had one could not find the language in which to couch it. Besides there was another and a deeper reason. A boy, being what he is, the most sensitive and the most secretive of living creatures regarding his innermost emotions, rarely does bare his real thoughts to his elders, for they, alas, are not young enough to have a fellow feeling, and they are too old and they know too much to be really wise.

What we might have answered, had we had the verbal facility and had we not feared further painful corporeal measures for talking back--or what was worse, ridicule--was that reading Old Cap Collier never yet sent a boy to a bad end. I never heard of a boy who ran away from home and really made a go of it who was actuated at the start by the nickul librury. Burning with a sense of injustice, filled up with the realization that we were not appreciated at home, we often talked of running away and going out West to fight Indians, but we never did. I remember once two of us started for the Far West, and got nearly as far as Oak Grove Cemetery, when--the dusk of evening impending--we decided to turn back and give our parents just one more chance to understand us.

What, also, we might have pointed out was that in a five-cent story the villain was absolutely sure of receiving suitable and adequate punishment for his misdeeds. Right then and there, on the spot, he got his. And the heroine was always so pluperfectly pure. And the hero always was a hero to his finger tips, never doing anything unmanly or wrong or cowardly, and always using the most respectful language in the presence of the opposite sex. There was never any sex problem in a nickul librury. There were never any smutty words or questionable phrases. If a villain said "Curse you!" he was going pretty far. Any one of us might whet up our natural instincts for cruelty on Fore's Book of Martyrs, or read of all manner of unmentionable horrors in the Old Testament, but except surreptitiously we couldn't walk with Nick Carter, whose motives were ever pure and who never used the naughty word even in the passion of the death grapple with the top-booted forces of sinister evil.

We might have told our parents, had we had the words in which to state the case and they but the patience to listen, that in a nickul librury there was logic and the thrill of swift action and the sharp spice of adventure. There, invariably virtue was rewarded and villainy confounded; there, inevitably was the final triumph for law and for justice and for the right; there embalmed in one thin paper volume, was all that Sandford and Merton lacked; all that the Rollo books never had. We might have told them that though the Leatherstocking Tales and Robinson Crusoe and Two Years Before the Mast and Ivanhoe were all well enough in their way, the trouble with them was that they mainly were so long-winded. It took so much time to get to where the first punch was, whereas Ned Buntline or Col. Prentiss Ingraham would hand you an exciting jolt on the very first page, and sometimes in the very first paragraph.

You take J. Fenimore Cooper now. He meant well and he had ideas, but his Indians were so everlastingly slow about getting under way with their scalping operations! Chapter after chapter there was so much fashionable and difficult language that the plot was smothered. You couldn't see the woods for the trees, But it was the accidental finding of an ancient and reminiscent volume one Sunday in a little hotel which gave me the cue to what really made us such confirmed rebels against constituted authority, in a literary way of speaking. The thing which inspired us with hatred for the so-called juvenile classic was a thing which struck deeper even than the sentiments I have been trying to describe.

The basic reason, the underlying motive, lay in the fact that in the schoolbooks of our adolescence, and notably in the school readers, our young mentalities were fed forcibly on a pap which affronted our intelligence at the same time that it cloyed our adolescent palates. It was not altogether the lack of action; it was more the lack of plain common sense in the literary spoon victuals which they ladled into us at school that caused our youthful souls to revolt. In the final analysis it was this more than any other cause which sent us up to the haymow for delicious, forbidden hours in the company of Calamity Jane and Wild Bill Hickok.

Midway of the old dog-eared reader which I picked up that day I came across a typical example of the sort of stuff I mean. I hadn't seen it before in twenty-five years; but now, seeing it, I remembered it as clearly almost as though it had been the week before instead of a quarter of a century before when for the first time it had been brought to my attention. It was a piece entitled, The Shipwreck, and it began as follows:

In the winter of 1824 Lieutenant G-----, of the United States Navy, with his beautiful wife and child, embarked in a packet at Norfolk bound to South Carolina.

So far so good. At least, here is a direct beginning. A family group is going somewhere. There is an implied promise that before they have traveled very far something of interest to the reader will happen to them. Sure enough, the packet runs into a storm and founders. As she is going down Lieutenant G----- puts his wife and baby into a lifeboat manned by sailors, and then--there being no room for him in the lifeboat--he remains behind upon the deck of the sinking vessel, while the lifeboat puts off for shore. A giant wave overturns the burdened cockleshell and he sees its passengers engulfed in the waters. Up to this point the chronicle has been what a chronicle should be. Perhaps the phraseology has been a trifle toploftical, and there are a few words in it long enough to run as serials, yet at any rate we are getting an effect in drama. But bear with me while I quote the next paragraph, just as I copied it down:

The wretched husband saw but too distinctly the destruction of all he held dear. But here alas and forever were shut off from him all sublunary prospects. He fell upon the deck-- powerless, senseless, a corpse--the victim of a sublime sensibility!

There's language for you! How different it is from that historic passage when the crack of Little Sure Shot's rifle rang out and another Redskin bit the dust. Nothing is said there about anybody having his sublunary prospects shut off; nothing about the Redskin becoming the victim of a sublime sensibility. In fifteen graphic words and in one sentence Little Sure Shot croaked him, and then with bated breath you moved on to the next paragraph, sure of finding in it yet more attractive casualties snappily narrated.

No, sir! In the nickul librury the author did not waste his time and yours telling you that an individual on becoming a corpse would simultaneously become powerless and senseless. He credited your intelligence for something. For contrast, take the immortal work entitled Deadwood Dick of Deadwood; or, The Picked Party; by Edward L. Wheeler, a copy of which has just come to my attention again nearly thirty years after the time of my first reading of it. Consider the opening paragraph:

The sun was just kissing the mountain tops that frowned down upon Billy-Goat Gulch, and in the aforesaid mighty seam in the face of mighty Nature the shadows of a Warm June night were gathering rapidly.

The birds had mostly hushed their songs and flown to their nests in the dismal lonely pines, and only the tuneful twang of a well-played banjo aroused the brooding quiet, save it be the shrill, croaking screams of a crow, perched upon the top of a dead pine, which rose from the nearly perpendicular mountain side that retreated in the ascending from the gulch bottom.

That, as I recall, was a powerfully long bit of description for a nickul librury, and having got it out of his system Mr. Wheeler wasted no more valuable space on the scenery. From this point on he gave you action--action with reason behind it and logic to it and the guaranty of a proper climax and a satisfactory conclusion to follow. Deadwood Dick marched many a flower-strewn mile through my young life, but to the best of my recollection he never shut off anybody's sublunary prospects. If a party deserved killing Deadwood just naturally up and killed him, and the historian told about it in graphic yet straightforward terms of speech; and that was all there was to it, and that was all there should have been to it.

At the risk of being termed an iconoclast and a smasher of the pure high ideals of the olden days, I propose to undertake to show that practically all of the preposterous asses and the impossible idiots of literature found their way into the school readers of my generation. With the passage of years there may have been some reform in this direction, but I dare affirm, without having positive knowledge of the facts, that a majority of these half-wits still are being featured in the grammar-grade literature of the present time. The authors of school readers, even modern school readers, surely are no smarter than the run of grown-ups even, say, as you and as I; and we blindly go on holding up as examples before the eyes of the young of the period the characters and the acts of certain popular figures of poetry and prose who--did but we give them the acid test of reason--would reveal themselves either as incurable idiots, or else as figures in scenes and incidents which physically could never have occurred.

You remember, don't you, the schoolbook classic of the noble lad who by reason of his neat dress, and by his use in the most casual conversation of the sort of language which the late Mr. Henry James used when he was writing his very Jamesiest, secured a job as a trusted messenger in the large city store or in the city's large store, if we are going to be purists about it, as the boy in question undoubtedly was?

It seems that he had supported his widowed mother and a large family of brothers and sisters by shoveling snow and, I think, laying brick or something of that technical nature. After this lapse of years I won't be sure about the bricklaying, but at any rate, work was slack in his regular line, and so he went to the proprietor of this vast retail establishment and procured a responsible position on the strength of his easy and graceful personal address and his employment of some of the most stylish adjectives in the dictionary. At this time he was nearly seven years old--yes, sir, actually nearly seven. We have the word of the schoolbook for it. We should have had a second chapter on this boy. Probably at nine he was being considered for president of Yale--no, Harvard. He would know too much to be president of Yale.

Then there was the familiar instance of the Spartan youth who having stolen a fox and hidden it inside his robe calmly stood up and let the animal gnaw his vitals rather than be caught with it in his possession. But, why? I ask you, why? What was the good of it all? What object was served? To begin with, the boy had absconded with somebody else's fox, or with somebody's else fox, which is undoubtedly the way a compiler of school readers would phrase it. This, right at the beginning, makes the morality of the transaction highly dubious. In the second place, he showed poor taste. If he was going to swipe something, why should he not have swiped a chicken or something else of practical value?

We waive that point, though, and come to the lack of discretion shown by the fox. He starts eating his way out through the boy, a messy and difficult procedure, when merely by biting an aperture in the tunic he could have emerged by the front way with ease and dispatch. And what is the final upshot of it all? The boy falls dead, with a large unsightly gap in the middle of him. Probably, too, he was a boy whose parents were raising him for their own purposes. As it is, all gnawed up in this fashion and deceased besides, he loses his attractions for everyone except the undertaker. The fox presumably has an attack of acute indigestion. And there you are! Compare the moral of this with the moral of any one of the Old Cap Collier series, where virtue comes into its own and sanity is prevalent throughout and vice gets what it deserves, and all.

In McGuffey's Third Reader, I think it was, occurred that story about the small boy who lived in Holland among the dikes and dams, and one evening he went across the country to carry a few illustrated post cards or some equally suitable gift to a poor blind man, and on his way back home in the twilight he discovered a leak in the sea wall. If he went for help the breach might widen while he was gone and the whole structure give way, and then the sea would come roaring in, carrying death and destruction and windmills and wooden shoes and pineapple cheeses on its crest. At least, this is the inference one gathers from reading Mr. McGuffey's account of the affair.

So what does the quick-witted youngster do? He shoves his little arm in the crevice on the inner side, where already the water is trickling through, thus blocking the leak. All night long he stands there, one small, half-frozen Dutch boy holding back the entire North Atlantic. Not until centuries later, when Judge Alton B. Parker runs for president against Colonel Roosevelt and is defeated practically by acclamation is there to be presented so historic and so magnificent an example of a contest against tremendous odds. In the morning a peasant, going out to mow the tulip beds, finds the little fellow crouched at the foot of the dike and inquires what ails him. The lad, raising his weary head--but wait, I shall quote the exact language of the book:

"I am hindering the sea from running in," was the simple reply of the child.

Simple? I'll say it is! Positively nothing could be simpler unless it be the stark simplicity of the mind of an author who figures that when the Atlantic Ocean starts boring its way through a crack in a sea wall you can stop it by plugging the hole on the inner side of the sea wall with a small boy's arm. Ned Buntline may never have enjoyed the vogue among parents and teachers that Mr. McGuffey enjoyed, but I'll say this for him--he knew more about the laws of hydraulics than McGuffey ever dreamed.

Irvin S. Cobb opens his essay with a personal anecdote: laid up sick in a small hotel, he finds only an ancient Fifth Reader to read. That tattered volume, with its "smell of age which is common to old books and old sheep," crystallizes a long-held idea—to write a plea for Old Cap Collier, a dime-novel hero. Cobb’s voice is immediately conversational, full of folksy exaggeration and self-deprecating humor. He recalls a childhood where nearly everything a normal boy wanted to do was "a spankable offense," and Sunday felt "three weeks long." This nostalgic, comic tone sets the stage for his argument: that the moralizing poetry forced on children is far less admirable than the adventure stories adults condemned.

A Satirist’s Case Against Canonical Poems

Cobb does not merely praise dime novels; he attacks the poems that replaced them in school readers. His chief target is the captain in Longfellow’s “The Wreck of the Hesperus,” who staggers down the stair shouting “We are lost!” Cobb scoffs: the captain should have remained calm, but instead he bellowed panic. The only excuse, Cobb jokes, is that his staggering came from “alcoholic stimulant.” He contrasts this with dime-novel heroes like Little Sure Shot, who never drank. Then he turns to Felicia Hemans’s “The Boy stood on the Burning Deck.” Cobb insists the boy was not heroic but “feeble-minded”—a “leather-headed young imbecile” who stood uselessly while the ship burned. He mockingly suggests the boy’s death saved society the trouble of institutionalizing him. These irreverent readings show Cobb using hyperbole and logical absurdity to undermine the moral authority of classic schoolroom poetry.

The Dime-Novel Hero as a Moral Alternative

Against these panic-stricken or foolish figures, Cobb sets the dime-novel hero: calm, resourceful, and sober. He invokes Old Cap Collier and Little Sure Shot as examples of steady courage. Where the poetic captain spreads alarm, the dime-novel hero would have acted decisively. Cobb’s argument is not that dime novels are great literature, but that they offer better role models than the poems forced on children. He notes that in his youth, dime novels were forbidden—spankable offenses—while the Fifth Reader’s poems were required. Yet the poems, he claims, teach either panic or idiocy. The dime novel, by contrast, shows a boy “natural love for adventure” channeled into competence. Cobb’s tone remains humorous, but his point is serious: the moral panic over cheap fiction was misplaced. The real danger, he implies, was the poetry that adults considered edifying.

A Colloquial Voice and Exaggerated Imagery

Cobb’s style is central to his persuasive method. He writes in a relaxed, Southern vernacular, full of asides and comic similes. Heaven, he says, was a place that “went unanimously Democratic every fall, because all the Republicans had gone elsewhere.” Hell is described with absurd domestic details: a deputy devil with an “asbestos napkin” asking how Satan wants his lost souls fried. This folksy humor disarms the reader, making his critique of poetry feel like common sense. He also uses direct address and rhetorical questions: “Could you imagine Little Sure Shot … doing an asinine thing like that? Not in ten thousand years, you couldn’t.” The repetition of “you” pulls the reader into agreement. Cobb’s exaggerations—like the boy being “spread about over the surface of the ocean in a broad general way”—are deliberately over-the-top, reinforcing his satirical stance.

The Structure of a Rambling Argument

The essay’s structure mirrors its conversational tone. Cobb begins with a personal story, then moves to a series of comic analyses of specific poems. He does not build a systematic case; instead, he piles on examples, each more ridiculous than the last. After dismissing the Hesperus captain and the burning-deck boy, he mentions Sweet Alice, who wept with delight at a smile—a figure he once called the “champion half-wit” of poetry. He admits he acted hastily in ranking her, but the admission itself becomes another joke. This rambling, associative structure suits Cobb’s persona: he is not a pedant but a good ol’ boy sharing a grudge. The essay feels like an extended monologue, with digressions and self-corrections that mimic spoken storytelling. The result is a plea that entertains even as it argues, using humor to make a point about what children should read.

Cobb’s essay is best read as a performance: a comic monologue that uses exaggeration and irreverence to question literary hierarchies. He does not provide a balanced critique of dime novels or a scholarly analysis of poetry. Instead, he offers a personal, nostalgic defense of the stories he loved as a boy. Readers should pay attention to Cobb’s diction—the colloquialisms, the mock-serious tone, the sudden shifts from anecdote to argument. The pleasure of the piece lies in its voice, not its logic. Approach it as a period piece of American humor, and enjoy the way Cobb turns schoolroom pieties upside down.

Reading Cobb’s fond, teasing defense of Old Cap Collier, I thought of my own childhood stack of yellowing paperbacks, where heroes were simply good. It also drifted me back to a quieter voice—Fithian’s diary entries from Virginia, noting the world’s slow rhythms and his own earnest place within it. Both felt like old friends leaning close. Journal and Letters of Philip Vickers Fithian: A Plantation Tutor of the Old Dominion, 1773-1774. — Key Ideas to Explore made me remember how a plain, daily honesty can feel just as adventurous.

Dylan Scott
1 week ago

Avery Hall
3 weeks ago

David Green
2 weeks ago

Mila Hernandez
2 weeks ago

5
5 out of 5 (4 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
  • ...
    Melinda William Rogers - 3 weeks ago
    {'title': 'A Plea For Old Cap Collier', 'reviews': [{'type': 'positive', 'content': "A charming and nostalgic defense of an old literary character. The author's passion for Old Cap Collier is infectious, and the arguments are both witty and persuasive. This book celebrates the joy of classic pulp fiction and is a must-read for fans of vintage detective stories and literary history."}, {'type': 'neutral', 'content': 'This short plea is a nice tribute to Old Cap Collier, capturing the appeal of the character for older readers. However, it feels more like a personal anecdote than a well-researched analysis, and some parts may be inaccessible to those unfamiliar with the original works.'}, {'type': 'negative', 'content': "The book is too brief and lacks substantial content, reading more like a rambling blog post than a well-argued essay. The author's nostalgia doesn't translate into a compelling case for Old Cap Collier's literary merit. Fans of the character might enjoy it, but others will find it unconvincing and slight."}]}


Reader reflection

Before you leave, reflect on the book

Use these questions to collect your thoughts before moving on.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

What is your current status with this title?

2

Did this book hold your interest?

3

Would you recommend this book to another reader?

4

How much effort did this book require?

Related eBooks