DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.51521#0083
(75)
scriptions of a lying-in hospital.” “So you do not aim at
distributing good literature, but exclude certain aspects
of life which you have decided dogmatically are not
suitable to your subscribers in Belgravia and Mayfair.”
“There is much in good literature that we are bound to
exclude.” “But can you explain how it is, Mr. Faux, that
everybody in England has praised the book, except you
and Mr. Mudie, and I heard yesterday that Mr. Mudie
had decided to admit the book into his library. Is it wis-
dom, Mr. Smith—but I changed the words on my lips to
Mr. Faux—when all the newspapers in England have
published articles in favour of the book—the Athenaeum,
the Spectator and the Quardian—the religious papers
are specially enthusiastic?” “No. I have read some of the
articles in praise of the book, Mr. Moore, but they have
said nothing that has shaken my opinion that the book
is not suitable to our library.” I spoke of classical litera-
ture, of Shakespeare and the Bible, but Mr. Faux shook
his long lean head and smiled dolefully. Classical litera-
ture was another matter. “But what do you do in certain
cases—Shakespeare for instance? You are aware of the
very doubtful success of Bowdler’s Family Shakespeare
and how little value a bowdlerised Shakespeare has to-
day?” I have forgotten what answer he gave to this inter-
jection, but I could see he was ready with some sort of
answer that would only lead us into further wrangling,
and I asked him instead about the literature he approved
scriptions of a lying-in hospital.” “So you do not aim at
distributing good literature, but exclude certain aspects
of life which you have decided dogmatically are not
suitable to your subscribers in Belgravia and Mayfair.”
“There is much in good literature that we are bound to
exclude.” “But can you explain how it is, Mr. Faux, that
everybody in England has praised the book, except you
and Mr. Mudie, and I heard yesterday that Mr. Mudie
had decided to admit the book into his library. Is it wis-
dom, Mr. Smith—but I changed the words on my lips to
Mr. Faux—when all the newspapers in England have
published articles in favour of the book—the Athenaeum,
the Spectator and the Quardian—the religious papers
are specially enthusiastic?” “No. I have read some of the
articles in praise of the book, Mr. Moore, but they have
said nothing that has shaken my opinion that the book
is not suitable to our library.” I spoke of classical litera-
ture, of Shakespeare and the Bible, but Mr. Faux shook
his long lean head and smiled dolefully. Classical litera-
ture was another matter. “But what do you do in certain
cases—Shakespeare for instance? You are aware of the
very doubtful success of Bowdler’s Family Shakespeare
and how little value a bowdlerised Shakespeare has to-
day?” I have forgotten what answer he gave to this inter-
jection, but I could see he was ready with some sort of
answer that would only lead us into further wrangling,
and I asked him instead about the literature he approved