PARRINGTON AND REALITY
33
the broadest, democracy. But to Parrington himself the question
must he different; his hook stands now at the center of thought
about America and one cannot help wondering if the literary his–
torian who does not have the perception to understand our best
artists understands more than our simplest problems.
III.
It took a special and admirable courage in Mr. Smith to con–
ceive and carry out his study of American criticism. Nothing could
be more arid than the beginnings of American literary thought,
nothing could be more complicated than its development. Yet the
difficult job needed doing; as Mr. Smith says, criticism is the link
between the art of America and its social forces, and an examina–
tion of this relation is bound to he suggestive, if not, as Mr. Smith
is too ready to believe, conclusive. Modestly, Mr. Smith puts forth
his hook as only the sketch for a larger work still to be done, per–
haps by some other scholar, hut though I cannot judge how much
more spadework is needed for a complete study, it seems to me
that Mr. Smith has underestimated what he has done. He has given -
us something a good deal more elaborate than a sketch and I sus–
pect that succeeding scholars will not have much of importance to
add. I think, however, that succeeding critics will have much to
correct, for sound as is the skeleton of Mr. Smith's work, the criti–
cal flesh that he has put on it is in a most precarious condition.
As with Parrington, the errors of Mr. Smith's judgment are
not merely errors of taste or of execution. He could put, as he has
put, his consideration of Edmund Wilson into a footnote, and give,
as he has given, pages of discussion to Michael Gold and Floyd
Dell and still not be so wrong as he is. He could believe, as he does
believe, that impressionist critics are not critics at all. He could
maintain, what might be morally desirable but certainly not his–
torically true, that "the battles of literature must he fought over
philosophies, not over styles." He could play the familiar weary
game of Jacobins vs. Jacobites and misinterpret, with the faint
sound of tumbrils threatening the "aristocrats" who admire it, the
whole meaning of Henry James's criticism. And I suppose he could
