gouutssts, says тописICYU 111 a Durst frankness. There you have the Wells hero the life. And Mr. Bennett's people are o spiritual guttersnipes who are not in love w unimaginable goddesses. The point is that the guttersnipe is hav his turn in fiction: if our American heroes not guttersnipes themselves, it is their sign grace to be supremely interested in gutt snipes. In one way or the other, the gutt snipe must have his proper prominence. course, there are differences and degrees few heroes get no nearer the lower clas than a passionate desire for reform tickets a municipal sanitation. But ordinarily they m go through Ernest Pontifex's state of believ that poor people are not only more importa but in every way way nicer than rich peop and few of them go back utterly on t belief, as Ernest did. Perhaps that, more th anything else, marks the change of fashion men. For gentlemen were always, in their w benevolent; but formerly they had not achie the paradox that the object of benevolence n philanthropy. been, reason, a tremendous spurt of ciological questions. Our hardmen, of high ideals, find them, of necessity, on a different ʼn any that strategists would have years ago. Moreover, philanoman's way into politics, women ving their calm, or hysterical, oblems which, thirty years since, -oblems, exist for them. I said e of taste in women would probor much of the change of fashion hoolmate of mine, writing me ce of her engagement, said (in ords), "He is tremendously iny missionary work; it wouldn't e perfect if we hadn't had that Both were spoiled darlings of he statement was quite sincere. without that, it would not have rfect" in the eyes of either. onversation of the marriageable nged past belief. "Social service" [114] tudes to impers or their sociol vidual personal If they agree social evils, the passion sufficien for the most p analysis. No in longer. As for it still with us, b House and Th both antiquated lem play now u legislation. And it no longer int There was a subtler manifes plays, than in t a novel was a preme importan could make the also of suprem The romance w sex was hardly tudes to impersonal questions, their religi or their sociological "principles." The in vidual personal reaction counts less and 1 If they agree on the same panacea for social evils, the author can usually patch u passion sufficient for them to marry on. Go for the most part, are the pages of intim analysis. No intimate analysis is needed longer. As for the "problem play," we h it still with us, but in another form. The Do House and The Second Mrs. Tanqueray both antiquated: we do not call a drama a pr lem play now unless it preaches a new kind legislation. And as for sex-in its finer asp it no longer interests us. There was a great deal more sex, in subtler manifestations, in the old novels plays, than in the new ones. Not so long a a novel was a love-story; and it was of preme importance to a hero whether or not could make the heroine care for him. It also of supreme importance to the hero The romance was all founded on sex; and sex was hardly mentioned. Our heroes I no time to make love to each ood old-fashioned way, because sy suppressing the red-light disiling statistics of disease. Much ess, doubtless, is a good thing; doubt, it has cheapened passion. mong civilized people is a subtle capped about with dreams and d can bring human beings to ell as to perdition. But when it as the mere province of courwonder that we turn from it to will have difficulty in feeling or specially since we are told, at that even the courtesan plies from direst necessity. e only safe person to fall in love is a reformer: socially, finanimentally. And most women, at they would) say with the Prin, "Je n'aime que les romans ais être l'héroïne." Certainly, e special reason, no novel of d not like to be the heroine-in |