"MY DEAR DR JAPP, - A good day to date this letter, which is, in fact, a confession of incapacity.During my wife's wretched illness - or I should say the worst of it, for she is not yet rightly well - I somewhat lost my head, and entirely lost a great quire of corrected proofs.This is one of the results: I hope there are none more serious.I was never so sick of any volume as I was of that; I was continually receiving fresh proofs with fresh infinitesimal difficulties.I was ill; I did really fear, for my wife was worse than ill.Well, 'tis out now; and though I have already observed several carelessnesses myself, and now here is another of your finding - of which indeed, I ought to be ashamed -
it will only justify the sweeping humility of the preface.
"Symonds was actually dining with us when your letter came, and I communicated your remarks, which pleased him.He is a far better and more interesting thing than his books.
"The elephant was my wife's, so she is proportionately elate you should have picked it out for praise from a collection, let us add, so replete with the highest qualities of art.
"My wicked carcass, as John Knox calls it, holds together wonderfully.In addition to many other things, and a volume of travel, I find I have written since December ninety Cornhill pp.of Magazine work - essays and stories - 40,000 words; and I am none the worse - I am better.I begin to hope I may, if not outlive this wolverine upon my shoulders, at least carry him bravely like Symonds or Alexander Pope.I begin to take a pride in that hope.
"I shall be much interested to see your criticisms: you might perhaps send them on to me.I believe you know that I am not dangerous - one folly I have not - I am not touchy under criticism.
"Sam and my wife both beg to be remembered, and Sam also sends as a present a work of his own.- Yours very sincerely, ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON."
As indicating the estimate of many of the good Edinburgh people of Stevenson and the Stevensons that still held sway up to so late a date as 1893, I will here extract two characteristic passages from the letters of the friend and correspondent of these days just referred to, and to whom I had sent a copy of the ATALANTA
Magazine, with an article of mine on Stevenson.
"If you can excuse the garrulity of age, I can tell you one or two things about Louis Stevenson, his father and even his grandfather, which you may work up some other day, as you have so deftly embedded in the ATALANTA article that small remark on his acting.
Your paper is pleasant and modest: most of R.L.Stevenson's admirers are inclined to lay it on far too thick.That he is a genius we all admit; but his genius, if fine, is limited.For example, he cannot paint (or at least he never has painted) a woman.No more could Fettes Douglas, skilful artist though he was in his own special line, and I shall tell you a remark of Russel's thereon some day.(4) There are women in his books, but there is none of the beauty and subtlety of womanhood in them.
"R.L.Stevenson I knew well as a lad and often met him and talked with him.He acted in private theatricals got up by the late Professor Fleeming Jenkin.But he had then, as always, a pretty guid conceit o' himsel' - which his clique have done nothing to check.His father and his grandfather (I have danced with his mother before her marriage) I knew better; but 'the family theologian,' as some of R.L.Stevenson's friends dabbed his father, was a very touchy theologian, and denounced any one who in the least differed from his extreme Calvinistic views.I came under his lash most unwittingly in this way myself.But for this twist, he was a good fellow - kind and hospitable - and a really able man in his profession.His father-in-law, R.L.Stevenson's maternal grandfather, was the Rev.Dr Balfour, minister of Colinton - one of the finest-looking old men I ever saw - tall, upright, and ruddy at eighty.But he was marvellously feeble as a preacher, and often said things that were deliciously, unconsciously, unintentionally laughable, if not witty.We were near Colinton for some years; and Mr Russell (of the SCOTSMAN), who once attended the Parish Church with us, was greatly tickled by Balfour discoursing on the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife, remarking that Mrs P-'s conduct was 'highly improper'!"
The estimate of R.L.Stevenson was not and could not be final in this case, for WEIR OF HERMISTON and CATRIONA were yet unwritten, not to speak of others, but the passages reflect a certain side of Edinburgh opinion, illustrating the old Scripture doctrine that a prophet has honour everywhere but in his own country.And the passages themselves bear evidence that I violate no confidence then, for they were given to me to be worked into any after-effort I might make on Stevenson.My friend was a good and an acute critic who had done some acceptable literary work in his day.
