The work is a trenchant critique of a widely read American humorist whose approach to literature and criticism is depicted as fundamentally flawed. It opens by examining a bitter controversy in which the humorist embarked on a personal, insulting attack against a French author’s work that, despite its imperfections, offered a fair portrayal of America. The critic condemns his opponent for a lack of scholarly rigor, arguing that his inability to engage properly with the literary giants of France, as well as with canonical Western texts, reveals a deficiency in taste and learning. The essay asserts that his humor, though popular and accessible, is excessively broad and coarse—a type that appeals more to the common man than to refined literary sensibilities. His works, while capturing the spirit of regional American life with a natural, earthy charm, are portrayed as simplistic and ill-suited to the demands of serious literature. The critic contrasts his style with that of esteemed European authors, suggesting that his failure to study the great masters results in shallow compositions unworthy of true literary achievement. Despite his achievements on popular platforms and his undisputed appeal among younger audiences—as illustrated by an anecdote involving an enthusiastic young reader—the humorist is held up as emblematic of the broader shortcomings of American literary culture. In this view, his work, though capable of evoking the nostalgic pleasures of familiar regional adventures, falls short when measured against the benchmarks of classical literature. The style, reminiscent of crude banter rather than cultivated wit, is seen as inherently limited, and his contributions are reduced to mere entertainment rather than the serious business of art. The work laments the unfortunate state of literary criticism in America, noting that the lack of a rigorous, scholarly tradition allows figures with mere common sense and rough humor to gain the same stature as those with more refined literary credentials. In doing so, it elevates the importance of a well-rounded literary education—one deeply acquainted with the works of Shakespeare, the Bible, and the great French masterpieces—and criticizes the prevailing cultural climate for failing to uphold these standards. Overall, the work presents a dual assessment: it acknowledges the humorist’s undeniable ability to connect with a broad audience and to vividly render moments of American life, while simultaneously decrying his failure to rise above the level of mere popular amusement. His writing is seen as a double-edged sword—charming in its authenticity and accessibility, yet ultimately trivializing the art of literature by sacrificing depth and sophistication for mere immediacy and plain-spoken humor.
By Willa Cather · First published 1910 · Genre: Literary Criticism, Essay, Satire