James Fenimore Cooper: American Men of LettersLounsbury, Thomas Raynesford
General
James Fenimore Cooper: American Men of Letters
Lounsbury, Thomas Raynesford
Cooper, James Fenimore, 1789-1851; Novelists, American -- 19th century -- Biography
After the controversy in regard to the Three Mile Point, the attacks of
the Whig journals increased in bitterness. The state of mind it caused
in Cooper can be seen in a little volume, published by him in April,
1838, entitled "The American Democrat." This work is made up of a
singular mixture of abstract discussions on liberty and equality, on the
nature of parties, on forms of government, and of remarks on national
habits and manners. It is not an interesting hook. Yet it is fair to say
of it, that it is animated throughout by a lofty patriotism, and it
manifests a clear view of the dangers and duties of a democracy, (p. 178)
with its comparative advantages and disadvantages. But it likewise
exhibited some of the most uncompromising traits of the author's
character. In writing it, he was not aiming at popularity; it might not
be much out of the way to say that he was aiming at unpopularity. The
doctrine with which he sets out is, that in this country power rests
with the people, and power ought always to be chidden rather than
commended. He was accordingly liberal in criticism. But the value of
what he said was largely impaired, if not wholly destroyed by the
one-sidedness of view and tendency to over-statement into which his
ardor of feeling now habitually hurried him. In nothing is this
extravagance more strikingly seen than in the comments in this work upon
the press. There was a great deal of truth in what he said; but the
justice of some of his views was deprived of any effect by the
exaggeration and consequent injustice of others. The substance of his
remarks was that there were more newspapers in this country than in
Europe, but they were generally of a lower character. The multiplication
of them was due to the fact that little capital was required in their
creation, and little intelligence employed in their management. Their
number was, therefore, not a thing to be boasted of but rather to be
sorrowed over, since the quality diminished in an inverse ratio to the
quantity. Nor was there anything in the methods employed by the press
that justified any exultation in its prosperity. It tyrannized over
public men, over letters, over the stage, over even private life. Under
the pretence of preserving public morals, it corrupted them to the core.
Under the semblance of maintaining liberty, it was gradually
establishing a despotism as rude, as grasping, and as vulgar as (p. 179)
that of any state known. It loudly professed freedom of opinion, but
exhibited no tolerance. It paraded patriotism, but never sacrificed
interest. But its great fundamental failing was the untrustworthiness of
its statements. It existed to pervert truth. Its conductors were mainly
political adventurers. They were unscrupulous, but they were not so
utterly ignorant that they failed to see the necessity of occasionally
making correct assertions. It was, however, this mixture of fact with
fiction that was the chief cause of the evil influence exerted. The
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account