The whole pa.s.sage, too long to be quoted, suggests an instructive a.n.a.lysis of the mental qualities and disposition that go to make a good letter-writer--a dash of egotism, sensitiveness to outward impressions, literary charm, the habit of keeping a frank and familiar record of every day"s moods, thoughts, and doings, the picturesque surroundings of a strange land. In these journal letters from Samoa the canon of improvisation is to a certain extent infringed, for Stevenson wrote with publicity in distant view; and the depressing influence of remoteness is in his case overcome, for he lived in tropical Polynesia, "far off amid the melancholy main," and had speech with his correspondent only at long intervals. But it is the privilege of genius to disconcert the rules of criticism; the letters have none of the vices of the diary, the trivialities are never dull, the incidents are uncommon or uncommonly well told, and the writer is never caught looking over his shoulder at posterity.

For extracts there is now little s.p.a.ce left in this article; but we may quote, to show Stevenson"s style of landscape-painting, a few lines describing a morning in Samoa after a heavy gale:

"I woke this morning to find the blow quite ended. The heaven was all a mottled grey; even the East quite colourless. The downward slope of the island veiled in wafts of vapour, blue like smoke; not a leaf stirred on the tallest tree. Only three miles below me on the barrier reef I could see the individual breakers curl and fall, and hear their conjunct roaring rise, like the roar of a thoroughfare close by."

It is good for the imaginative letter-writer to live within sight and sound of the sea, to hear the long roll, and to see from his window "a nick of the blue Pacific." It is also good for him to be within range of savage warfare, and to take long rough rides in a disturbed country. On one such occasion he writes:

"Conceive such an outing, remember the pallid brute that lived in Skerryvore like a weevil in a biscuit, and receive the intelligence that I was rather the better for my journey. Twenty miles ride, sixteen fences taken, ten of the miles in a drenching rain, seven of them fasting and in the morning chill, and six stricken hours"

political discussions with an interpreter; to say nothing of sleeping in a native house, at which many of our excellent literati would look askance of itself."

The feat might not seem miraculous to a captain of frontier irregulars in hard training; but for a delicate novelist in weak health it was pluckily done. These letters would be readable if Stevenson had written nothing else, though of course their worth is doubled by our interest in a man of singular talent who died prematurely. They ill.u.s.trate the tale of his life and portray his character; and they form an addition, valuable in itself, and unique as a variety, to the series of memorable English letter-writers.

Mr. Colvin mentions, in his preface, that Stevenson"s talk was irresistibly sympathetic and inspiring, full of matter and mirth. It cannot be denied that between correspondence and conversation, regarded as fine arts, there is a close kinship; and very similar reasons have been alleged for the common belief that both are on the decline. Whether such a belief has any solid foundation in the case of letter-writing, we may be warranted in doubting. Observations of this sort, which have a false air of acuteness and profundity, are repeated periodically. The remark so constantly made at this moment, that nowadays people read nothing but magazines, was made by Coleridge early in this century; and Southey prophesied the ruin of good letters from the penny post. It is true that the number of letters written must have increased enormously; it is also true that many more are published than heretofore, and that as a great many of these are not above mediocrity, are valueless as literature, and of little worth biographically, they produce on the disappointed reader the effect of a general depreciation of the standard. Nevertheless, this article will have been written to little purpose, unless it has shown fair cause for rejecting such a conclusion, and for maintaining that, although fine letter-writers, like poets, are few and far between, yet they have not been wanting in our own time, and are not likely to disappear. There will always be men, like Coleridge or Carlyle, whose impetuous thoughts and humoristic conceptions cannot perpetually submit to the forms and limitations and delays of printing and publishing, but must occasionally demand instant liberation and prompt delivery by the natural process of private letters. And although the stir and bustle of the world is increasing, so that quiet corners in it are not easily kept, yet it is probable that the race of literary recluses--of those who pa.s.s their days in reading books, in watching the course of affairs, and in corresponding with a select circle of friends--will also continue. Whether Englishwomen, who write letters up to a certain point better than Englishmen, will now rise, as Frenchwomen have done, to the highest line, and why they have not done so heretofore, are points that we have no s.p.a.ce here for taking up.

But it is the exceptional peculiarity of letters, as a form of literature, that the writer can never superintend their publication.

During his lifetime he has no control over them, they are not in his hands; and they do not appear until after his death. He must rely entirely, therefore, upon the discretion of his editor, who has to balance the wishes of a family, or the susceptibilities of an influential party in politics or religion, against his own notions of duty toward a departed friend, or against his artistic inclination toward presenting to the world a true and unvarnished picture of some remarkable personage. He may resolve, as Froude did in the case of Carlyle, that "the sharpest scrutiny is the condition of enduring fame," and may determine not to conceal the frailties or the underlying motives which explain conduct and character. He may refuse, as in the case of Cardinal Manning, to set up a smooth and whitened monumental effigy, plastered over with colourless panegyric, and may insist on showing a man"s true proportions in the alternate light and shadow through which every life naturally and inevitably pa.s.ses. But such considerations would lead us beyond our special subject into the larger field of Biography; and we must be content, on the present occasion, with this endeavour to sketch in bare outline the history and development of English letter-writing, and to examine very briefly the elementary conditions that conduce to success in an art that is universally practised, but in which high excellence is so very rarely attained.

FOOTNOTES:

[7] (1) _The Letters of Charles Lamb._ Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by Alfred Ainger. London, 1888. (2) _Letters of John Keats to his Family and Friends._ Edited by Sidney Colvin. London, 1891. (3) _Letters and Verses of Arthur Penrhyn Stanley._ Edited by Rowland E.

Prothero. London, 1895. (4) _Letters of Matthew Arnold_, 1848-88.

Collected and arranged by George Russell. London and New York, 1895.

(5) _Letters of Edward FitzGerald to f.a.n.n.y Kemble._ Edited by William Aldis Wright. London, 1895. (6) _Vailima Letters, from Robert Louis Stevenson to Sidney Colvin_, 1890-94. London, 1895.--_Edinburgh Review_, April 1896.

[8] Mr. John Morley, _Nineteenth Century_, December 1895.

[9] _Dean Stanley"s Letters_, p. 440.

THACKERAY

It is remarkable that in a century which is far more profusely supplied with biographies than any preceding age, and at a time when chronicles of small beer no less than of fine vintages seem to gratify the rather indiscriminate taste of the British public, no formal life has ever been produced of Thackeray. That this omission has been due to his express wish is well understood, and at any rate it may be cited as a praiseworthy breach of the latter-day custom of publishing a man"s private affairs and correspondence as soon as possible after his funeral. Nevertheless the generation of those who knew Thackeray, for whom and among whom he wrote, is now rapidly vanishing; so that it would have been a kind of national misfortune if posterity had been left without some authentic record of his personal history, his earlier experiences, his characteristic sayings and doings, and the general environment in which he worked.

For the biographical introductions, therefore, which are appended to each volume of this new edition,[10] we owe grat.i.tude to his daughter, Mrs. Richmond Ritchie.[11] No more than seven volumes have been actually published up to this date, but since these include a large proportion of Thackeray"s most important and characteristic work, we make no apology for antic.i.p.ating the completion of the series by an attempt to make a critical examination of the salient points which distinguish his genius, and mark his place in general literature. Mrs.

Ritchie tells us in a brief prefatory note that although her father"s wishes have prevented her from writing his complete biography she has at last determined to publish memories which chiefly concern his books. Her desire has also been "to mark down some of the truer chords to which his life was habitually set"; and accordingly we have in every volume an instalment, too brief and intermittent for such interesting matter, of the incidents and vicissitudes belonging to successive stages of his life and work, with glimpses of his mind and tastes, of the friendships that he made, and the society in which he moved. The form in which these reminiscences and _reliquiae_ appear has necessarily disconnected them, since they have been evidently chosen on the plan of connecting each novel with the circ.u.mstances or particular field of observation which may have suggested the plot, the scenery, or the characters. One can thus see that Thackeray"s mind, like his sketch-book, was constantly taking down vivid impressions of people and places, and in some of his notes of travel can be easily traced the sources whence he took hints for elaborate studies. But under this arrangement the chronology becomes here and there somewhat entangled. _Pendennis_, for example, was finished in 1850, but as the hero"s life at Oxbridge is described in the novel, its introduction takes us back to the period when the writer himself was at Cambridge in 1829. _Vanity Fair_, again, written in 1845, contains a well-known episode of Dobbin"s school life, and the story carries us more than once to the Continent; so the introduction gives us recollections of Charterhouse, where Thackeray went in 1822, and of travels about Germany in the early thirties. The _Contributions to Punch_, which form the sixth volume of this series, began in 1842, and lasted ten years. They provide occasion for many diverting anecdotes, and for references to his colleagues who founded the fortunes of that most successful of comic papers; but as on this plan the biographical lines cross and recross each other it is not easy for the reader to obtain a connected or comprehensive view of Thackeray"s career. Nevertheless as the system fortunately affords room and reason for giving many fresh details of his daily life, with some of his letters, or extracts from them, which are fresh and amusing, we may cheerfully pa.s.s over these petty drawbacks. We are heartily thankful for our admission to a closer acquaintance with an author who has drawn some immortal pictures of English society, its manners, prejudices, and characteristic types, in novels that will always hold the first rank in our lighter literature.

How his boyhood was pa.s.sed is tolerably well known already. Returning home in childhood from India he was put first to a preparatory school, and afterwards, for nigh seven years, to Charterhouse. At eighteen he went up to Cambridge, where he spoke in the Union, wrote in university magazines, criticised Sh.e.l.ley"s _Revolt of Islam_, "a beautiful poem, though the story is absurd," and composed a parody on Tennyson"s prize poem, _Timbuctoo_. In 1830 he travelled in Germany, and had his interview at Weimar with Goethe; and from 1831 we find him settled in a London pleader"s office, reading law with temporary a.s.siduity, frequenting the theatres and Caves of Harmony, making many literary acquaintances, taking runs into the country to canva.s.s for Charles Buller, and trying his "prentice hand at journalism. His vocation for literature speedily damped his legal ardour, and drew him out of Mr.

Tapsell"s chambers, where he left a desk full of sketches and caricatures. In May 1832 he wrote: "This lawyer"s preparatory education is certainly one of the most cold-blooded, prejudicial pieces of invention that ever a man was slave to;" and he longs for fresh air and fresh b.u.t.ter. By August he had fled to Paris, where he read French, worked at a painter"s _atelier_, and took seriously to the work of a newspaper correspondent. On the romantic school, which was just then at its height, he makes the following remark, which betrays the antipathy to artificial and theatrical tendencies in literature that always provoked his satire:

"In the time of Voltaire the heroes of poetry and drama were fine gentlemen; in the days of Victor Hugo they bl.u.s.ter about in velvet and mustachios and gold chains, but they seem in nowise more poetical than their rigid predecessors."

He had little taste, in fact, for mediaevalism in any shape, and "old Montaigne" was more to his liking. We are told, also, that he became absorbed in Cousin"s _Philosophy_, noting upon it that "the excitement of metaphysics must equal almost that of gambling"; and finding, perhaps, no great attraction in either. After his marriage in 1836 he settled down in London, devoting himself thenceforward to literature as a profession; the _Yellowplush Papers_, published in 1837 by _Fraser"s Magazine_, being his earliest contribution of any length or significance. In the introductory chapter Mrs. Ritchie says:

"I hardly know--nor, if I knew, should I care to give here--the names and the details of the events which suggested some of the _Yellowplush Papers_. The history of Mr. Deuceace was written from life during a very early period of my father"s career. Nor can one wonder that his views were somewhat grim at that particular time, and still bore the impress of an experience lately and very dearly bought.... As a boy he had lost money at cards to some cardsharpers who sc.r.a.ped acquaintance with him. He never blinked at the truth or spared himself; but neither did he blind himself to the real characters of the people in question, when once he had discovered them. His villains became curious studies in human nature; he turned them over in his mind, and he caused Deuceace, Barry Lyndon, and Ikey Solomons, Esq., to pay back some of their ill-gotten spoils, in an involuntary but very legitimate fashion, when he put them into print and made them the heroes of those grim early histories."

We may infer from this pa.s.sage that Thackeray"s mind acted not only as a microscope but as a magnifying gla.s.s; he had an eye, as one knows, for characteristic details, and it appears that he could also enlarge the small fry of scoundrelism into magnificent rascals. There can be no doubt that he had the image-making faculty of sensitive genius, and that much of all he saw and felt went to fill up his canvas and fix his point of view. Writing to his mother, he once said, "It is the fashion to say that people are unfortunate who have lost their money.

Dearest mother, we know better than that;" though "for years and years he had to face the great question of daily bread." But while he could battle stoutly against losses of this kind, he had no mercy on the rogues who caused them; and his indignation, accentuated by the strain of married life on a very narrow income, may account in some degree for the cynical tone, now sombre, now mocking, which so perceptibly dominates his earlier writings, and pervades all his books, though in a lesser and more tolerant way, up to the end. Against this shaded background, however, we may set many kindly figures, and the contrast is heightened by the humorous joviality which finds vent in his talent for caricature. To this we owe the full-length portrait of Major Gahagan, and a whole gallery of other drawings, usually of Irishmen, which have been the delight of innumerable readers. The striking alternation between two extremes of character and conduct, between tragedy and farce, between ridiculous meanness and pathetic unselfishness, is to be found in all his novels, though in his later and finer work it is controlled and tempered to more artistic proportions. But in the productions of his youth the darker tints so predominate as to disconcert the judgment of a generation which has become habituated, at the present day, to a less energetic and uncompromising style of exposing fools and gibbeting knaves. And after making due allowance for those indescribable differences of taste which separate us from our fathers in every region of art--and even admitting, what is by no means sure, that sixty years ago rascality, sn.o.bbery, and humbug were more rampant in society than nowadays--we are still disposed to regret that a writer whose best work is superlatively good should have dwelt so persistently in his earlier stories upon the dreary and ign.o.ble side of English life. From some pa.s.sages in them it might be inferred by foreigners that the better born Englishmen habitually indulged in rudeness toward their social inferiors, and that English domestics in good houses broke out into vulgar insolence whenever they could do so with impunity.

Take, for an example, in the scene from _The Great Hoggarty Diamond_, the behaviour of Mr. Preston, "one of her Majesty"s Secretaries of State," to an underbred but good-tempered little city clerk, whom Lady Drum takes in her carriage for a drive in Hyde Park, and whom she hints he might ask to dinner. Mr. Preston acts on the hint, but with savage sarcasm, and t.i.tmarsh, the clerk, accepts in order to plague the minister for his astounding rudeness:

""I did not," he says, "intend to dine with the man, but only to give him a lesson in manners.""

And so, when the carriage drove up to Mr. Preston"s door, he says to him:

""When you came up and asked who the devil I was, I thought you might have put the question in a more polite manner, but it wasn"t my business to speak. When, by way of a joke, you invited me to dinner, I answered in a joke too, and here I am. But don"t be frightened, I"m not agoing to dine with you."...

""Is that all, sir?" says Mr. Preston, still in a rage. "If you have done, will you leave the house, or shall my servants turn you out? Turn out this fellow; do you hear me?""

a.s.suming that sixty years ago a Secretary of State was much the same sort of man that he is to-day, what are we to think of this spirited colloquy? and what kind of impression will it, and others no less forcible, produce upon the future student of manners who turns to light literature as the mirror of contemporary society?

With regard, again, to the _Yellowplush Papers_, is it from unpardonable fastidiousness, the affectation of an over-refined literary taste, that we are inclined to question whether they have been wisely preserved in standard editions of so great a novelist? The use of ludicrously distorted spelling intensifies the impression of ignorant vulgarity, and there is a moral lesson in the story of Mr.

Deuceace that atones in some degree for the very low company whom we meet in it. But the labour of deciphering the ugly words, and the cheerless atmosphere of sordid vice and servility which they are most appropriately used to describe, are so unfamiliar to contemporary novel-readers that we think few will master two hundred pages of this dialect in the present edition. On the whole, after renewing our old acquaintance with Mr. Jeames, with Captain Rook and Mr. Pigeon, with Mr. Stubbs of the Fatal Boots, and others of the same kidney, we doubt whether these immature character sketches, which all belong to the author"s first and most Hogarthian manner, do not range below the legitimate boundaries of literature as a fine art, and whether they do not much rather harm than heighten his permanent reputation when they are placed on a line with his masterpieces by formal reproduction. It is impossible to take much interest in personages with an unbroken record of profligacy and baseness; and we are reminded of the Aristotelian maxim that pure wickedness is no subject for dramatic treatment.

Yet we are aware that it may be practically impossible to publish incomplete editions of a very popular writer; and in the extravagances of his youth one may discern the promise of much higher things. Very rapidly, in fact, in the work which comes next, Thackeray rises at once to a far superior level of artistic performance. We are not indisposed to endorse the opinion, p.r.o.nounced more than once by good judges, that the high-water mark of his peculiar genius was touched by _Barry Lyndon_, which first exhibits the rare and distinctive qualities that were completely developed in his later and larger novels. It may be affirmed, as a general rule, that most of our eminent writers of fiction have leapt, as Scott did, into the arena with some work of first-cla.s.s merit, which has immediately caught public attention and established their position in literature. Their fugitive pieces, their crudities and imperfect essays, have been either judiciously suppressed or consigned to oblivion. They have followed, one may say, the goodly custom prescribed by the governor of the Cana marriage feast; they put forth in the beginning their good wine, and they fall back upon inferior brands only when the public, having well drunk of the potent vintage, will swallow anything from a favourite author. We may regret that Thackeray"s start as a man of letters should have furnished an exception to this salutary rule; and in surveying, after the lapse of many years, his collected works, we are disposed to observe that no first-cla.s.s writer has suffered more from the enduring popularity which has encouraged the republication of everything that is his, from the finished _chefs-d"oeuvres_ down to the ephemeral and unripe products of an exuberant youth. He would have given the world a notable confirmation of the rule that a great author usually leads off on a high note, if he had opened his munificent literary entertainment with _Barry Lyndon_. We quote here from Mrs.

Ritchie"s introduction:

"My father once said to me when I was a girl, "You needn"t read _Barry Lyndon_; you won"t like it." Indeed it is scarcely a book to _like_, but one to admire and to wonder at for its consummate power and mastery.... Barry Lyndon tells his own story, so as to enlist every sympathy against himself, and yet all flows so plausibly, so glibly, that one can hardly explain how the effect was produced.

From the very first sentence, almost, one receives the impression of a lawless adventurer, brutal, heartless, with low instincts and rapid perceptions. Together with his own autobiography, he gives a picture of the world in which he lives and brags, a picture so vivid ... that as one reads one almost seems to hear the tread of remorseless fate sounding through all the din and merriment. Take those descriptions of the Prussian army during the Seven Years"

War, and of that hand of man which weighs so heavily upon man--what a haunting page in history!"

These remarks are very justly appreciative, for the book stamps Thackeray as a fine impressionist, as an artist who skilfully mixes the colours of reality and imagination into a composition of striking scenes and the effective portrayal of character. With extraordinary ability and consistency to the type he works out the gradual evolution of a wild Irish boy, hot-headed in love and fighting, full of daring impetuosity and ignorant vanity, into the ruffianly soldier, the intrepid professional gambler, and finally into the selfish profligate, who marries a great heiress and sets up as a county magnate. Instead of the mere unadulterated villainy and meanness which were impersonated in his previous stories, we have here the complex strength and weakness of real human nature; we have the whole action lifted above the platform of city swindlers, insignificant scoundrels, and needy cardsharpers, up to a stage exhibiting historic personages and scenes, courts and battlefields; and we breathe freely in the wider air of immorality on a grand scale. As a sample of spirited freehand drawing, the sketches of Continental society, "before that vulgar Corsican upset the gentry of the world," are admirable for their force and originality; and what can be better as a touch of character than the following defence of his profession by a prince of gamblers?

"I speak of the good old days of Europe, before the cowardice of the French aristocracy (in the shameful Revolution, which served them right) brought ruin on our order.... You call a doctor an honourable man--a swindling quack, who does not believe in the nostrums which he prescribes, and takes your guinea for whispering in your ear that it"s a fine morning; and yet, forsooth, a gallant man who sits him down before the baize and challenges all comers, his money against theirs, his fortune against theirs, is proscribed by your modern moral world. It is a conspiracy of the middle cla.s.ses against gentlemen; it is only the shopkeeper cant which is to go down nowadays. I say that play was an inst.i.tution of chivalry; it has been wrecked along with other privileges of men of birth."

Here we have the romance of the gaming-table; and in the same chapter Barry Lyndon recounts the evil chance that befell him at cards with two young students, who had never played before:

"As ill luck would have it, they were tipsy, and against tipsiness I have often found the best calculations of play fail entirely. A few officers joined; they played in the most perfectly insane way, and won always.... And in this ign.o.ble way, in a tavern room thick with tobacco smoke, across a deal table besmeared with beer and liquor, and to a parcel of hungry subalterns and beardless students, three of the most skilful and renowned players in Europe lost seventeen hundred louis. It was like Charles xii. or Richard Coeur de Lion falling before a petty fortress and an unknown hand."

The picture of gamblers in a grimy tavern, the unconscious humour of Lyndon"s heroic lament, the comparison between the cardsharpers"

discomfiture and the fall of mighty warriors, make up a fine example of Thackeray"s eye for graphic detail, and prove the force and temper of his incisive irony.

Yet, in spite of its great excellence, the book still labours under the artistic disadvantage of having a rogue for its hero. Thackeray was too good an artist to be unconscious of this defect, and in a footnote to page 215 he defends his choice characteristically. After admitting that Mr. Lyndon maltreated his lady in every possible way, bullied her, robbed her to spend the money in gambling and taverns, kept mistresses in her house, and so on, he argues:

"The world contains scores of such amiable people, and, indeed, it is because justice has not been done them that we have edited this autobiography. Had it been that of a mere hero of romance--one of those heroic youths who figure in the novels of Scott or James, there would have been no call to introduce the reader to a personage already so often and so charmingly depicted. Mr. Barry is not, we repeat, a hero of the common pattern; but let the reader look round and ask himself, "Do not as many rogues succeed in life as honest men, more fools than men of talent?" And is it not just that the lives of this cla.s.s should be described by the students of human nature as well as the actions of those fairy-tale princes, those perfectly impossible heroes," etc., etc.

One would be almost inclined to infer from this pa.s.sage that the author had identified himself so completely with his own creation as to have become slightly infected with Mr. Barry Lyndon"s sophistry; for it is impossible to maintain seriously that rogues and fools are no less successful in life than men of honesty and talent. But the truth is that Thackeray found in a daring rogue a much finer subject for character-drawing than in the blameless hero, while he was deeply implicated in the formidable revolt which Carlyle was leading against the respectabilities of that day.

It is worth notice that in Barry Lyndon"s military reminiscences, done with great vigour and fidelity of detail, we have a very early example of the realistic as contrasted with the romantic treatment of campaigns, of life in the bivouac and the barrack. This method, which has latterly had immense vogue, seems to have been first invented in France, where Thackeray may have taken the hint from Stendhal; but we are disposed to believe that he was the first who proclaimed it in England. As it professes to give the true unvarnished aspect of war it would certainly have accorded with Thackeray"s natural contempt, so often shown in his writings, for the commonplaces of the military romancer who revelled in the pomp and circ.u.mstance of glorious battles, the charges, the heroic exploits, the honours, rather than the horrors, of the fighting business. Moreover, it is not only in style and treatment but also in sentiment and in certain peculiar prepossessions, that we can trace in this novel the lines which the writer followed throughout his narratives, and his favourite delineations of character. For diplomatists he has always a curious contempt, and he never misses an opportunity of ridiculing them. "Mon Dieu," says Lyndon, "what fools they are; what dullards, what fribbles, what addle-headed c.o.xcombs; this is one of the lies of the world, this diplomacy"--as if it were not also a most important and difficult branch of the national services. Abject reverence of great folk he regarded as the besetting disease of middle-cla.s.s Englishmen; and so we find Lyndon remarking, by the way, that Mr. Hunt, Lord Bullingdon"s governor, "being a college tutor and an Englishman, was ready to go on his knees to any one who resembled a man of fashion."

And the kindly cynicism which discoloured Thackeray"s ideas about women, notwithstanding his tender admiration and love for the best of them, comes out pointedly in old Sir Charles Lyndon"s advice to Barry on the subject of matrimony:

"Get a friend, sir, and that friend a woman, a good household drudge, who loves you. _That_ is the most precious sort of friendship, for the expense of it is all on the woman"s side. The man need not contribute anything. If he"s a rogue, she"ll vow he"s an angel; if he"s a brute, she will like him all the better for his ill-treatment of her. They like it, sir, these women; they are born to be our greatest comforts and conveniences, our moral boot-jacks, as it were."

Barry Lyndon discloses the promise and potency of Thackeray"s genius.

In _Vanity Fair_, his next work, it has attained its climax; the dramatic figures are more finely conceived, the plot is varied and more skilfully elaborated, the actors more numerous and life-like; and whereas in his preceding stories he has mainly used the form of a fict.i.tious memoir, whereby the hero is made to tell his own tale, in this "Novel without a Hero" the author proceeds by narration. The tone is still governed by irony and pathos, wherein Thackeray chiefly excels; yet the contrasts between weak and strong natures, the superiority of honesty and the moral sense over craftiness and unscrupulous cleverness, are now touched off with a lighter and surer hand. The unmitigated villain and the coa.r.s.e-tongued hard-hearted virago have disappeared with other primitive stage properties; the human comedy is played by men and women of the upper world, with their virtues and frailties sufficiently set in relief, yet not exaggerated, for the purposes of the social drama. The book"s very t.i.tle, _Vanity Fair_, denotes a transition from the scathing satire of his earlier manner to more indulgent irony, from Swift to Sterne, two authors whom Thackeray had evidently studied attentively. In his short preface the author preludes with the gentler note when he invites people of a lazy, benevolent, or sarcastic mood to step into the puppet show for a moment and look at the performance.