More on Bryant

I'm attempting once again to repost one of the editorials written by Bryant in 1839, for Sherry and others who may be chomping at the bit to read it. This editorial by Bryant originally appeared in the New York Evening Post, Jan. 11, 1839. Bryant was the literary editor of the NY Eve. Post and worked with the Post for 50 years. I know the context of this is referencing America's [lack of] national literatutre, but similar thoughts were shared along a broader scale, fifty years after Bryant's essay. The following one by Henry Cabot Lodge briefly includes art, architecture, and fashion in his discussion, with and even stronger statement against Colonialism in politics and it's lingering effect in literary circles. It is called "Colonialism in the United States" by Henry Cabot Lodge. Read both and see what you think. I am stoked by the connections I am learning along the way. It's very interesting that even now, at the beginning of the 21st century, we have been plagued yet again by the thoughts of "What does Europe Think?"

Now, to be fair, I have been blessed to enjoy Europe multiple times over the last twenty years, but hey, I still prefer my homeland. Only in Europe (Italy this last time) will the waiter snub you if you think his capuccino is far too expensive in St. Mark's Square and calmly assert to him, "No thank you!" When you realize what other food you could buy with $8.40 European dollars, it's pretty easy to state your thoughts. Heck, you can buy a whole large package of Italian espresso (maybe two!) to take home and enjoy multiple cups of Java with foam later...on your OWN linen tablecloth. $8.40, simply because famous people throughout history have supped or taken afternoon coffee there. Normally, I like to blend in to the country I'm visiting, speak the language as much as possible, be a quiet visitor, instead of the steriotypical "obnoxious, loud American" (and I have seen those, while traveling) But, $8.40 for one small cup off capuccino???? That is where I draw the line! hrrrmmmppphhhh!

Now, on to the Bryant editorial from 1839...

vocabulary: animadversion - hypercriticism, judgement, hairsplitting

"Sentsitiveness to Foreign Opinion"

Cooper's last work, "Home as Found," has been fiercely attacked, in more than one quarter, for its supposed tendency to convey to the people of other countries a bad idea of our national character. Without staying to examine whether all Mr. Cooper's animadversions on American Manners are perfectly just, we seize the occasion to protest against this excessive sensibility to the opinion of other nations. It is no matter what they think of us. We constitute a community large enough to form a great moral tribunal for the trial of any question which may arise among ourselves. There is no occasion for this perpetual appeal to the opinions of Europe. We are competent to apply the rules of right and wrong boldly and firmly, without asking in what light the superior judgement of the Old World may regard our decisions.

It has been said of Americans that they are vainglorious, boastful, fond of talking of the greatness and the advantages of their country, and of the excellence of their national character. They have this foible in common with other nations; but they have another habit which shows that, with all their national vanity, they are not so confident of their own greatness, or of their own capacity to estimate it properly, as their boasts would imply. They are perpetually asking, What do they think of us in Europe? How are we regarded abroad? If a foreigner publishes an account of his travels in this country, we are instantly on the alert to know what notion of our character he has communicated to his countrymen; if an American author publishes a book, we are eager to know how it is received abroad, that we may know how to judge it ourselves. So far has this humor been carried that we have seen an extract, from a third- or fourth-rate critical work in England, condemning some American work, copied into all our newspapers one after another, as if it determined the character of the work beyond appeal or question.

For our part, we admire and honor a fearless accuser of the faults of so thin-skinned a nation as ours, always supposing him to be sincere and well-intentioned. He may be certain that where he has sowed animadversion he will reap an abundant harvest of censure and obloquy. He will have one consolation, however, that if his book be written with ability it will be read; that the attacks which are made upon it will draw it to the public attention; and that it may thus do good even to those who recalcitrate most violently against it.

If every man who writes a book, instead of asking himself the question what good it will do at home, were first held to inquire what notions it conveys of Americans to persons abroad, we should pull the sinews out of our literature. There is much want of free-speaking as things stand at present, but this rule will abolish it altogether. It is bad enough to stand in fear of public opinion at home, but, if we are to superadd the fear of public opinion abroad, we submit to a double despotism. Great reformers, preachers of righteousness, eminent satirists in different ages of the world--did they, before entering on the work they were appointed to do, ask what other nations might think of their countrymen if they gave utterance to the voice of salutary reproof?