OCR Interpretation

The day book. (Chicago, Ill.) 1911-1917, June 02, 1914, NOON EDITION, Image 2

Image and text provided by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL

Persistent link: http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045487/1914-06-02/ed-1/seq-2/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

going on in journalism, not excepting the magazine experiment illustrated
by Harper's Weekly. -If it succeeds, it is likely to be the beginning of a revo
lution. Anything addressed to us by the editor of so brilliant an effort must
affect us. Our convictions, nevertheless, are our convictions, and when
Mr. Cochran jeers at art we dissent. The danger of a cultivated publica
tion is that it wilt become in economics and politics a tool of the moneyed
class. The danger of a publication
which represents the many 1s that it
will yell in order to be heard, and in
its yelling be unjust to essential
truths. We agree with Mr. Cochran
that right thinking on public affairs
is more important than taste, but we
should like to urge his consideration
of the thought that the two things
are not separable. Jefferson cared
'much for the finer shadings of hu
man expression, and so did Lincoln
and so does Wilson, and so generally
do those men whose leadership in
the Democratic movement is most
fertile and most safe. Harper's Week
ly will sacrifice the artistic in form to
the essential in substance whenever
a choice is inevitable, but form and
substance are so related that the best
in one cannot be obtained without be
ing wedded to the best in the other."
The startling admission Hapgood is
going to force from me is that I don't
know a darned thing about art. And
I am just as willing to admit that
Hapgood does. So I will take art as
Hapgood finds it and likes it and
hands it to me, if he will just go on
injecting his own personality into
Harper's along with the art.
That is, I won't find fault with the'
art if Hapgood goes ahead with the
human Dunch. If I can't understand
and appreciate art, I can skip it; and
I will get my ten cents' worth out of
what Hapgood writes. Moreover, if
he can get the high-brows to read
the human things he writes by sugar
coating it with art, why then I'm
strong for the art good, bad or in
different. When I first heard Clarence Dar
row analyze the perfect woman, I
triedto analyze the perfect man. As
1 remember it, Darrow's analysis
was something like this: Mentality
2 per cent, Spirituality 3 per cent,
Anatomy 95 per cent.
In some instances, Darrow was
generous enough, if demand . was
made, to take off some from Spirit
uality and Mentality and add it on to
In trying to apply the Darrow rule
to men, I tried substituting Bar
barianism for Anatomy, throwing in
other ingredients. That would make
the" perfect man something like this:
Mentality 2 per cent, Spirituality 1
per cent, Art 2 per cent, Conceit 45
per cent, Barbarianism 50 per cent.
I would be willing to throw off 40
per cent of the Conceit and add it to
Barbarianism, and let the rest of it
stand as it is. ,
I might have put Culture in as an-
f other ingredient, but figured that
there isn't enough of it in the or
dinary man to stand alone, and
thought it could work its way into
Conceit or Art. I wouldn't under
any circumstances that I can think
of take anything from Barbarianism.
I am too modest to make specific
claims as to Barbarianism in my own
case, but my proudest boast is that
I am a barbarian. The culture on me
is so thin it cracks every time I
laugh and the barbarianism goes
clear to the marrow of the bone.
Art is low because I haven't ac
quired it. I love it all right, but am
not sure enough of what it is to un
derstand it. My love for art is blind.
.But I have really tried to under
stand it, Norman. I have tried to
understand bronze statues of great
men, but there is always spmething
about a statue that makes me laugh.
Out on Michigan boulevard the other
day when I was watching the after
noon parade of beautiful nature in
feminine disguise, I saw pigeons
roosting on the metal statue of Gen.

xml | txt