The Works of Robert Louis Stevenson - Swanston Edition, Vol. 03 — Text and Context

(9 User reviews)   2260
Stevenson, Robert Louis, 1850-1894 Project Gutenberg 2009 Not confirmed
Literature -- History and criticism; Horror tales; English literature -- 19th century Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 107,959
Reading time 470 min
Text sections 12

The catalog record for The Works of Robert Louis Stevenson - Swanston Edition, Vol. 03 — Text and Context provides practical reading context through 107,959 words, 7 hr 50 min estimated reading time, and 12 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 27.0 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 “Literature -- History and criticism,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

This volume collects Stevenson's Familiar Studies of Men and Books, critical essays on figures from Villon to Whitman, plus the short story 'The Body-Snatcher.' The preface frames the essays as personal, not definitive, and the Villon study includes a detailed account of a 1456 burglary.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.8/5

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

Thoreau were content to dwell by Walden Pond, it was not merely with designs of self-improvement, but to serve mankind in the highest sense. Hither came the fleeing slave; thence was he despatched along the road to freedom. That shanty in the woods was a station in the great Underground Railroad; that adroit and philosophic solitary was an ardent worker, soul and body, in that so much more than honourable movement, which, if atonement were possible for nations, should have gone far to wipe away the guilt of slavery. But in history sin always meets with condign punishment; the generation passes, the offence remains, and the innocent must suffer. No underground railroad could atone for slavery, even as no bills in Parliament can redeem the ancient wrongs of Ireland. But here at least is a new light shed on the Walden episode.

Second, it appears, and the point is capital, that Thoreau was once fairly and manfully in love, and, with perhaps too much aping of the angel, relinquished the woman to his brother. Even though the brother were like to die of it, we have not yet heard the last opinion of the woman. But be that as it may, we have here the explanation of the "rarefied and freezing air" in which I complained that he had taught himself to breathe. Reading the man through the books, I took his professions in good faith. He made a dupe of me, even as he was seeking to make a dupe of himself, wresting philosophy to the needs of his own sorrow. But in the light of this new fact, those pages, seemingly so cold, are seen to be alive with feeling. What appeared to be a lack of interest in the philosopher turns out to have been a touching insincerity of the man to his own heart; and that fine-spun airy theory of friendship, so devoid, as I complained, of any quality of flesh and blood, a mere anodyne to lull his pains. The most temperate of living critics once marked a passage of my own with a cross and the words, "This seems nonsense." It not only seemed; it was so. It was a private bravado of my own, which I had so often repeated to keep up my spirits that I had grown at last wholly to believe it, and had ended by setting it down as a contribution to the theory of life. So with the more icy parts of this philosophy of Thoreau's. He was affecting the Spartanism he had not; and the old sentimental wound still bled afresh, while he deceived himself with reasons.

Thoreau's theory, in short, was one thing and himself another: of the first, the reader will find what I believe to be a pretty faithful statement and a fairly just criticism in the study; of the second he will find but a contorted shadow. So much of the man as fitted nicely with his doctrines, in the photographer's phrase, came out. But that large part which lay outside and beyond, for which he had found or sought no formula, on which perhaps his philosophy even looked askance, is wanting in my study, as it was wanting in the guide I followed. In some ways a less serious writer, in all ways a nobler man, the true Thoreau still remains to be depicted.

VILLON. I am tempted to regret that I ever wrote on this subject, not merely because the paper strikes me as too picturesque by half, but because I regarded Villon as a bad fellow. Others still think well of him, and can find beautiful and human traits where I saw nothing but artistic evil; and by the principle of the art, those should have written of the man, and not I. Where you see no good, silence is the best. Though this penitence comes too late, it may be well, at least, to give it expression.

The spirit of Villon is still living in the literature of France. Fat Peg is oddly of a piece with the work of Zola, the Goncourts, and the infinitely greater Flaubert; and, while similar in ugliness, still surpasses them in a native power. The old author, breaking with an _eclat de voix_ out of his tongue-tied century, has not yet been touched on his own ground, and still gives us the most vivid and shocking impression of reality. Even if that were not worth doing at all, it would be worth doing as well as he has done it; for the pleasure we take in the author's skill repays us, or at least reconciles us to the baseness of his attitude. Fat Peg (_La Grosse Margot_) is typical of much; it is a piece of experience that has nowhere else been rendered into literature; and a kind of gratitude for the author's plainness mingles, as we read, with the nausea proper to the business. I shall quote here a verse of an old student's song; worth laying side by side with Villon's startling ballade. This singer, also, had an unworthy mistress, but he did not choose to share the wages of dishonour; and it is thus, with both wit and pathos, that he laments her fall:--

Nunc plango florem AEtatis tenerae Nitidiorem Veneris sidere: Tunc columbinam Mentis dulcedinem, Nunc serpentinam Amaritudinem. Verbo rogantes Removes ostio, Munera dantes Foves cubiculo, Illos abire praecipis A quibus nihil accipis, Caecos claudosque recipis, Viros illustres decipis Cum melle venenosa.[1]

But our illustrious writer of ballades it was unnecessary to deceive; it was the flight of beauty alone, not that of honesty or honour, that he lamented in his song; and the nameless mediaeval vagabond has the best of the comparison.

There is now a Villon Society in England; and Mr. John Payne has translated him entirely into English, a task of unusual difficulty. I regret to find that Mr. Payne and I are not always at one as to the author's meaning; in such cases I am bound to suppose that he is in the right, although the weakness of the flesh withholds me from anything beyond a formal submission. He is now upon a larger venture, promising us at last that complete Arabian Nights to which we have all so long looked forward.

CHARLES OF ORLEANS. Perhaps I have done scanty justice to the charm of the old Duke's verses, and certainly he is too much treated as a fool. The period is not sufficiently remembered. What that period was, to what a blank of imbecility the human mind had fallen, can only be known to those who have waded in the chronicles. Excepting Comines and La Salle and Villon, I have read no author who did not appal me by his torpor; and even the trial of Joan of Arc, conducted as it was by chosen clerks, bears witness to a dreary sterile folly,--a twilight of the mind peopled with childish phantoms. In relation to his contemporaries, Charles seems quite a lively character.

It remains for me to acknowledge the kindness of Mr. Henry Pyne, who, immediately on the appearance of the study, sent me his edition of the Debate between the Heralds: a courtesy from the expert to the amateur only too uncommon in these days.

KNOX. Knox, the second in order of interest among the reformers, lies dead and buried in the works of the learned and unreadable M'Crie. It remains for some one to break the tomb and bring him forth, alive again and breathing, in a human book. With the best intentions in the world, I have only added two more flagstones, ponderous like their predecessors, to the mass of obstruction that buries the reformer from the world; I have touched him in my turn with that "mace of death," which Carlyle has attributed to Dryasdust; and my two dull papers are, in the matter of dulness, worthy additions to the labours of M'Crie. Yet I believe they are worth reprinting in the interest of the next biographer of Knox. I trust his book may be a masterpiece; and I indulge the hope that my two studies may lend him a hint or perhaps spare him a delay in its composition.

Of the PEPYS I can say nothing; for it has been too recently through my hands; and I still retain some of the heat of composition. Yet it may serve as a text for the last remark I have to offer. To Pepys I think I have been amply just; to the others, to Burns, Thoreau, Whitman, Charles of Orleans, even Villon, I have found myself in the retrospect ever too grudging of praise, ever too disrespectful in manner. It is not easy to see why I should have been most liberal to the man of least pretensions. Perhaps some cowardice withheld me from the proper warmth of tone; perhaps it is easier to be just to those nearer us in rank and mind. Such at least is the fact, which other critics may explain. For these were all men whom, for one reason or another, I loved; or when I did not love the men, my love was the greater to their books. I had read them and lived with them; for months they were continually in my thoughts; I seemed to rejoice in their joys and to sorrow with them in their griefs; and behold, when I came to write of them, my tongue was sometimes hardly courteous and seldom wholly just.

[1] "Gaudeamus: Carmina vagorum selecta." Leipsic: Truebner, 1879.

FAMILIAR STUDIES OF MEN AND BOOKS

VICTOR HUGO'S ROMANCES

Apres le roman pittoresque mais prosaique de Walter Scott il restera un autre roman a creer, plus beau et plus complet encore selon nous. C'est le roman, a la fois drame et epopee, pittoresque mais poetique, reel mais ideal, vrai mais grand, qui enchassera Walter Scott dans Homere.--VICTOR HUGO on "Quentin Durward."

Victor Hugo's romances occupy an important position in the history of literature; many innovations, timidly made elsewhere, have in them been carried boldly out to their last consequences; much that was indefinite in literary tendencies has attained to definite maturity; many things have come to a point and been distinguished one from the other; and it is only in the last romance of all, "Quatrevingt-treize," that this culmination is most perfect. This is in the nature of things. Men who are in any way typical of a stage of progress may be compared more justly to the hand upon the dial of the clock, which continues to advance as it indicates, than to the stationary milestone, which is only the measure of what is past. The movement is not arrested. That significant something by which the work of such a man differs from that of his predecessors goes on disengaging itself and becoming more and more articulate and cognisable. The same principle of growth that carried his first book beyond the books of previous writers carries his last book beyond his first. And just as the most imbecile production of any literary age gives us sometimes the very clue to comprehension we have sought long and vainly in contemporary masterpieces, so it may be the very weakest of an author's books that, coming in the sequel of many others, enables us at last to get hold of what underlies the whole of them--of that spinal marrow of significance that unites the work of his life into something organic and rational. This is what has been done by "Quatrevingt-treize" for the earlier romances of Victor Hugo, and, through them, for a whole division of modern literature. We have here the legitimate continuation of a long and living literary tradition; and hence, so far, its explanation. When many lines diverge from each other in direction so slightly as to confuse the eye, we know that we have only to produce them to make the chaos plain: this is continually so in literary history; and we shall best understand the importance of Victor Hugo's romances if we think of them as some such prolongation of one of the main lines of literary tendency.

When we compare the novels of Walter Scott with those of the man of genius who preceded him, and whom he delighted to honour as a master in the art--I mean Henry Fielding--we shall be somewhat puzzled, at the first moment, to state the difference that there is between these two. Fielding has as much human science; has a far firmer hold upon the tiller of his story; has a keen sense of character, which he draws (and Scott often does so too) in a rather abstract and academical manner; and finally, is quite as humorous and quite as good-humoured as the great Scotsman. With all these points of resemblance between the men, it is astonishing that their work should be so different. The fact is, that the English novel was looking one way and seeking one set of effects in the hands of Fielding; and in the hands of Scott it was looking eagerly in all ways and searching for all the effects that by any possibility it could utilise. The difference between these two men marks a great enfranchisement. With Scott the Romantic movement, the movement of an extended curiosity and an enfranchised imagination, has begun. This is a trite thing to say; but trite things are often very indefinitely comprehended: and this enfranchisement, in as far as it regards the technical change that came over modern prose romance, has never perhaps been explained with any clearness.

To do so, it will be necessary roughly to compare the two sets of conventions upon which plays and romances are respectively based. The purposes of these two arts are so much alike, and they deal so much with the same passions and interests, that we are apt to forget the fundamental opposition of their methods. And yet such a fundamental opposition exists. In the drama the action is developed in great measure by means of things that remain outside of the art; by means of real things, that is, and not artistic conventions for things. This is a sort of realism that is not to be confounded with that realism in painting of which we hear so much. The realism in painting is a thing of purposes; this, that we have to indicate in the drama, is an affair of method. We have heard a story, indeed, of a painter in France who, when he wanted to paint a sea-beach, carried realism from his ends to his means, and plastered real sand upon his canvas; and that is precisely what is done in the drama. The dramatic author has to paint his beaches with real sand: real live men and women move about the stage; we hear real voices; what is feigned merely puts a sense upon what is; we do actually see a woman go behind a screen as Lady Teazle, and, after a certain interval, we do actually see her very shamefully produced again. Now all these things, that remain as they were in life, and are not transmuted into any artistic convention, are terribly stubborn and difficult to deal with; and hence there are for the dramatist many resultant limitations in time and space. These limitations in some sort approximate towards those of painting: the dramatic author is tied down, not indeed to a moment, but to the duration of each scene or act; he is confined to the stage almost as the painter is confined within his frame. But the great restriction is this, that a dramatic author must deal with his actors, and with his actors alone. Certain moments of suspense, certain significant dispositions of personages, a certain logical growth of emotion,--these are the only means at the disposal of the playwright. It is true that, with the assistance of the scene-painter, the costumier and the conductor of the orchestra, he may add to this something of pageant, something of sound and fury; but these are, for the dramatic writer, beside the mark, and do not come under the vivifying touch of his genius. When we turn to romance, we find this no longer. Here nothing is reproduced to our senses directly. Not only the main conception of the work, but the scenery, the appliances, the mechanism by which this conception is brought home to us, have been put through the crucible of another man's mind, and come out again, one and all, in the form of written words. With the loss of every degree of such realism as we have described, there is for art a clear gain of liberty and largeness of competence. Thus, painting, in which the round outlines of things are thrown on to a flat board, is far more free than sculpture, in which their solidity is preserved. It is by giving up these identities that art gains true strength. And so in the case of novels as compared with the stage. Continuous narration is the flat board on to which the novelist throws everything. And from this there results for him a great loss of vividness, but a great compensating gain in his power over the subject; so that he can now subordinate one thing to another in importance, and introduce all manner of very subtle detail, to a degree that was before impossible. He can render just as easily the flourish of trumpets before a victorious emperor and the gossip of country market women, the gradual decay of forty years of a man's life and the gesture of a passionate moment. He finds himself equally unable, if he looks at it from one point of view--equally able, if he looks at it from another point of view--to reproduce a colour, a sound, an outline, a logical argument, a physical action. He can show his readers, behind and around the personages that for the moment occupy the foreground of his story, the continual suggestion of the landscape; the turn of the weather that will turn with it men's lives and fortunes, dimly foreshadowed on the horizon; the fatality of distant events, the stream of national tendency, the salient framework of causation. And all this thrown upon the flat board--all this entering, naturally and smoothly, into the texture of continuous intelligent narration.

Stevenson opens his preface with a frank admission: these studies, gathered from the monthly press, were written for different audiences and under different editors. He does not claim omniscience, noting that to judge Knox and Burns requires 'a grasp upon the very deepest strain of thought in Scotland,' while treating Hugo and Villon demands knowledge of French art and history. The tone is conversational, even self-deprecating, as he acknowledges the limits of his own preparation.

The volume then moves into the essays themselves, each a blend of biography and literary criticism. The study of François Villon, for instance, shifts abruptly from general remarks about medieval Parisian crime to a minute-by-minute account of a burglary at the College of Navarre in 1456. Stevenson describes the thieves in shirt-sleeves, a ladder applied to a wall, and a walnut coffer yielding five hundred crowns—details that read like a police report rendered by a novelist.

A Critic Who Admits His Limits

Stevenson’s preface is remarkable for its honesty about the author’s own fallibility. He writes that 'not the most erudite of men could be perfectly prepared to deal with so many and such various sides of human life and manners.' This is not false modesty; it is a methodological statement. He treats his subjects as 'worthies' brought together from different ages and countries, and he makes no pretense of delivering final judgments. Instead, he offers what he calls 'familiar studies'—personal, provisional, and openly shaped by his own tastes and limitations.

The effect is to invite the reader into a conversation rather than a lecture. When he discusses Walt Whitman or Henry David Thoreau, he does so as a fellow writer trying to understand two 'types' of American character, not as a scholar pronouncing from on high. This approach gives the essays a freshness that more systematic criticism often lacks.

The Burglary at the College of Navarre

In the Villon essay, Stevenson pauses his biographical sketch to narrate a single criminal episode in extraordinary detail. The date is Christmas 1456; the place, the Mule Tavern and then an unoccupied house belonging to Robert de Saint-Simon. The gang includes Villon, Petit-Jehan, De Cayeux, Dom Nicolas the Picardy monk, and the hapless Tabary, who is left to guard the overcoats. Stevenson describes how they 'clambered over in a twinkling' a high wall, picked four locks on a chest, then three more on a walnut coffer, and emerged with five hundred crowns of gold.

The prose is brisk and almost journalistic, but it is also slyly humorous. Stevenson notes that Tabary, who had copied out 'a whole improper romance with his own right hand,' was awed by his companions' skill with picklocks. The passage reads like a heist story, complete with a ladder, shirt-sleeves, and a lantern. It is the most vivid set-piece in the volume, and it shows Stevenson’s ability to shift from critical analysis to narrative storytelling without missing a beat.

Voices Across the Essays

One of the pleasures of this collection is the variety of Stevenson’s voice as he moves from subject to subject. In the essay on Samuel Pepys, he is wry and intimate; in the study of John Knox, he is grave and respectful; in the piece on Charles of Orleans, he is almost tender. The Villon essay combines scholarly detachment with a novelist’s eye for character and setting. Stevenson refers to the 'muddy wits' of Tabary, the 'superb operators' Petit-Jehan and De Cayeux, and Villon himself as a man who 'could have made a new improper romance out of his own head.'

The short story 'The Body-Snatcher,' which closes the volume, offers yet another register: Gothic, tense, and grimly physical. The shift from the essays to this tale is abrupt, but it demonstrates Stevenson’s range. Readers moving through the volume will encounter a writer who is by turns a critic, a historian, a humorist, and a horror writer—sometimes within the same paragraph.

This volume rewards reading in two directions: forward, as Stevenson builds his portraits from scattered facts, and backward, as the essays illuminate each other. The Villon burglary, for instance, gains resonance when set beside the moral seriousness of the Knox essay. The reader is encouraged to treat the collection not as a unified argument but as a series of experiments in voice and method—each one a different key, but all unmistakably Stevenson’s.

There’s something tender about Stevenson calling his essays “personal, not definitive,” as if he’s whispering to us across the years. I kept thinking of that while re-reading the Villon burglary—not grand history, just a life mishandled. It felt oddly close to the quiet solemnity of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address Given November 19, 1863 on the battlefield near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, USA — Context and Discussion, where grief, too, refuses to be anything but human.

Gabriel Rivera
2 weeks ago

Carter Allen
3 weeks ago

Oliver Sanchez
2 weeks ago

Daniel Robinson
4 weeks ago

Carter Robinson
3 weeks ago

4.5
4.5 out of 5 (9 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

Take a moment to reflect on this book

Create a short personal record of your experience with this book.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

What is your current status with this title?

2

How did the book work for you overall?

3

Would you pass this book on to a friend?

4

What was the reading difficulty like?

Related eBooks