The Brass Check: A Study of American JournalismSinclair, Upton
General
The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism
Sinclair, Upton
Associated Press; Journalism -- United States; Press -- United States
I was at this time planning the sequel to “The Metropolis,” called “The
Money-changers.” The story of the 1907 panic fitted perfectly into my
purposes, and so I made it the basis of this novel. Needless to say, I
couldn’t get the “American Magazine” or any other magazine to publish it
serially, nor could I get any respectable publishing-house to take up
the book. I was forced to go to a fifth-rate concern, which afterwards
went into bankruptcy. By the literary reviewers I was now practically
boycotted; I had written a book of scandal, I had declassed myself as a
man-of-letters. The fact that every word I had written was the truth,
and that the men I pilloried were the plunderers of a great nation, made
no difference whatever to the austere guardians of our literary
traditions.
Since the year 1908, when “The Money-changers” was published, it has
been the rule of American literary authorities that in discussions of
American novelists my name is not mentioned. In 1914 Georg Brandes, the
greatest of living critics, visited America, and to reporters at the
steamer he made the statement that there were three American novelists
whom he found worth reading, Frank Norris, Jack London, and Upton
Sinclair. Every New York newspaper except one quoted Dr. Brandes as
saying that there were _two_ American novelists he found worth reading,
Frank Norris and Jack London. Dr. Brandes was puzzled by this incident,
and asked me the reason; when I told him, he consented to write a
preface to my next novel, “King Coal.” He spoke so highly of the book
that I refrain from quoting him. But did his praise make any difference
to American critics? It did not.
All the publicity “The Money-changers” got was from our “yellow”
journals. The reader will understand that I despise these “yellows”;
they are utterly without honor, they are vulgar and cruel; and yet, in
spite of all their vices, I count them less dangerous to society than
the so-called “respectable” papers, which pretend to all the virtues,
and set the smug and pious tone for good society—papers like the “New
York Tribune” and the “Boston Evening Transcript” and the “Baltimore
Sun,” which are read by rich old gentlemen and maiden aunts, and can
hardly ever be forced to admit to their columns any new or vital event
or opinion. These are “kept” papers, in the strictest sense of the term,
and do not have to hustle on the street for money. They serve the
pocketbooks of the whole propertied class—which is the meaning of the
term “respectability” in the bourgeois world. On the other hand the
“yellow” journals, serving their own pocketbooks exclusively, will often
print attacks on vested wealth, provided the attacks are startling and
sensational, and provided the vested wealth in question is not a heavy
advertiser. An illustration of what I mean is the following, which
appeared in the “New York American” for September 6, 1908:
U. S. NAVY ADMITS ROTTEN ARMOR
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