A year ago, in the introduction to "The Best ShortStories of 1916," I
pointed out that the American short story cannot be reduced to a
literary formula, because the art in which it finds its concrete
embodiment is a growing art. The critic, when he approaches American
literature, cannot regard it as he can regard any foreign literature.
Setting aside the question of whether our cosmopolitan population, [mehr][weniger]
It was unmoored. The following day Wolff wrote a polemical dissertation
in the Figaro and carried away his colleagues. The volume was a brilliant
success, thanks to Boule de Suif. Despite the novelty, the honesty of
effort, on the part of all, no mention was made of the other stories.
Relegated to the second rank, they passed without notice. From his first
battle, Maupassant was master of the field in literature. [mehr][weniger]
At once the entire press took him up and said what was appropriate regarding the budding celebrity. Biographers and reporters sought information concerning his life. As it was very simple and perfectly straightforward, they resorted to invention. And thus it is that at the present day Maupassant appears to us like one of those ancient heroes whose origin and death are veiled in mystery. [mehr][weniger]