5. Abolish the “I” from literature, that is to say, _psychology_; replace the “I,” the ego, by the _matter_, the essence of which must be appreciated by intuitions. Heretofore the matter, the real substance of a book or a poem, has been obscured by the intervention of the ego of the writer, by the persistent “I” of the author, who is too much pre-occupied with himself and filled with prejudices and conceits in his own supreme wisdom. In short, writers use the subjects of the works as vehicles to exploit themselves. (Here the Futurists certainly put their finger on one of the weak spots in literature.) 6. Revolution in _typographical_ appearance: Suppress the ornaments, fancy initials, &c., &c., of the presented printed page, which impede rather than assist the natural flow of expression. “We will employ on the same page three or four inks of different colors, and twenty different characters, if necessary: for example, italics to express rapid sensations; capitals for violent; &c., &c. New conception of the _graphic_ printed page.” * * * * * All of which sounds wildly extravagant, but in sum and substance it simply means the death of the, let us say, Henry James style and the apotheosis of the front page of the modern sensational journal. And is it not true that the painfully involved and boresome style of Henry James--the adjectival and adverbial style, the style of endless qualifications, the assertion and amplification of the “ego” style--is rapidly becoming obsolete in fiction as it has long been obsolete in American journalism? And is it not true that the _terse_, the _substantive_, the _journalistic_ style, together with the printed page in many colors and many types, is gaining vogue? In even the matter of punctuation the painstaking use of the comma and the semicolon has yielded to the free use of the dash. Only a short time ago there appeared a lamentation by a well-known writer over the use of the dash in dialogue. He counted an unbelievable number on one page of a popular magazine, each of which, he thought, should have been replaced by one of the more orthodox signs. But the orthodox signs are _too slow_. Modern conversation does not move in studied phrases and rounded periods; its sign is the _dash_, because the dash either breaks the thought abruptly or carries it over into the words of the next speaker. * * * * * Furthermore, before leaving the subject, it should be [Illustration: VAN REES Maternity] noted that there is coming over our literature a profound, a radical change, _a change in the direction of terser, more forcible expression_; a change in the _direction of the elimination of superfluous words_, of _condensation_, to the end that the imagination and intelligence of the _reader_ will be called more and more into play.