CAVEAT LECTOR
Srit,—A recent [April 22nd] number of The Queen contains, under a fantastic title, an article about myself by Richard Aldington. This article is a verbatim reprint of one which appeared in the New York Esquire of last November. That, in its turn, was a transcript—if I remember rightly—of another paper on the same exhilarating topic in the New Atlantic Monthly of several months earlier.
Now: are we as interesting as that? And if so, why not a few literary criticisms instead of all these tiresome personal details? Tiresome, and incorrect ; interspersed among some friendly remarks I find no less than twenty-three misstatements in the two pages of The Queen article, Caveat lector. I shall not enumerate them (unless asked to do so) beyond saying that the ninth and tenth paragraphs are an invention. The facts, including copy of an official letter, are given on p. 239-240 of a book of mine called. Looking Back.
What astonishes me is that English readers are supposed to relish this kind of empty twaddle about—not about a duchess, but about an ordinary Writer. Do they really relish it? Can they all relish it? Or will some of them wonder why The Queen should not be able to produce anything more original or amusing than a reprint of this antiquated American trash?
Which reminds me that a little while ago a friend sent me a copy of Aldingt.m's autobiography Life for Life's Sake, published in New York. A book is not an ephemeral weekly or monthly, and this one may some day be reprinted over here. It contains a promise to write a " biographical and critical essay 'on myself ' at some fitting time "—disquieting news— as well as a good dose of misstatements ; three of them, on p. 375-376, with a cat-like flavour. I shall not warm up this cold broth save " at some fitting time." Meanwhile, Caveat lector. Sheridan or somebody once said that no man was ever written down except by himself. I believe
Previous page
