containing this novel. St. Inier does not like "The Transferred Ghost." It has been one of the most popular of Stockton's extravaganzas, has been copied and recopied, quoted, criticised, imitated. Supposing St. Inier had been the editor of a magazine, he would have made a mistake in following the dictates of his own judgment and declining it. The editor, too, must ham to recognize the law of self-deception. And this is where "An Amateur" is in error when she suggests that writers should try and find out what the editor individually likes, and write to please him. One editor of a magazine used to declare that he accepted the things he disliked, in the hopes of pleasing the public. And all editors make at least a conscientious effort to cater to the public. The formula, therefore, should be changed to read, "Try and find out what the editor believes to be the public taste, and write to suit that." Of course, editors are human and fallible. They may misjudge the merits of an article, they may misjudge its popularity. They may be imbecile, but why accuse them of baseness?
With regard to a large number of "authors of established reputation" there is a test of popularity which St. Inier entirely ignores. He intimates that many of their articles are read only because the base editor forces them down the public throat. But this does not explain why these same articles, collected into book-form, find a ready sale,—in these days, too, when publishers have learned by dreary experience that it is only in the case of very popular authors that collections of miscellaneous sketches and stories find any sale at all. Again, take a serial like "The Hundredth Man." St. Inier dislikes it. It is safe to predict that when published in book-form its sales will outrival those of many, many books that St. Inier does like. The masses may be wrong. St. Inier may be right. But magazines are published for the masses, and not for the saints. Remember that this entire discussion is based upon the merits of the editor as a caterer to the public, not as a patron of literature.
In answer to Mr. Waters (who will please "accept the assurance," etc.), the Editor would say that there are undoubtedly a large number of pearls in the ocean of rejected literature. He often has a severe struggle with himself before he decides that an article is too long or too short, too special in its interests, too severely learned, too tragic, or is for any other reason unsuitable for his purposes. A certain proportion of these articles are by authors of established reputation. A certain proportion, again, find their way into other magazines. What is unsuitable for Lippincott's may be suitable for Harper's, or the Century, or Scribner's, and vice versa. And as to what induces so many people to write, he has no doubt that they are all—successful and unsuccessful alike—impelled by worthy and proper aims. The desire of fame, the wish to earn an honest livelihood, or to amuse and instruct your fellows, all of these are honorable motives. Some succeed, many fail. But there would be fewer successes if fewer people were willing to take the risk of failure. It is true that the test of marksmanship is to hit the target, but it is better to begin by aiming high than by aiming low.
Not failure, but low aim, is crime.
