The Introduction
Brilliant and magnetic as are these
two studies by Ambrose Bierce, and especially significant
as coming from one who was a boy soldier in the Civil
War, they merely reflect one side of his original and
many-faceted genius. Poet, critic, satirist,
fun-maker, incomparable writer of fables and masterly
prose sketches, a seer of startling insight, a reasoner
mercilessly logical, with the delicate wit and keenness
of an Irving or an Addison, the dramatic quality of
a Hugo, — all of these, and still in the prime
of his powers; yet so restricted has been his output
and so little exploited that only the judicious few
have been impressed.
Although an American, he formed his
bent years ago in London, where he was associated
with the younger Hood on Fun. There he laid the
foundation for that reputation which he today enjoys:
the distinction of being the last of the scholarly
satirists. With that training he came to San
Francisco, where, in an environment equally as genial,
his talent grew and mellowed through the years.
Then he was summoned to New York to assist a newspaper
fight against a great railroad, since the conclusion
of which brilliant campaign eastern journalism and
magazine work have claimed his attention.
Two volumes, “The Fiend’s
Delight” and “Cobwebs from an Empty Skull”
titles that would damn modern books — were collections
published years ago from his work on London Fun.
Their appearance made him at once the chief wit and
humorist of England, and, combined with his satirical
work on Fun, led to his engagement by friends of the
exiled Eugénie to conduct a periodical against her
enemies, who purposed to make her refuge in England
untenable by means of newspaper attacks. It is
easy to imagine the zest with which the chivalrous
Bierce plunged into preparations for the fight.
But the struggle never came; it was sufficient to
learn that Bierce would be the Richmond; the attack
upon the stricken ex-empress was abandoned.
When he was urged in San Francisco,
years afterward, to write more of the inimitable things
that filled those two volumes, he said that it was
only fun, a boy’s work. Only fun! There
has never been such delicious fun since the beginning
of literature, and there is nothing better than fun.
Yet it held his own peculiar quality, which is not
that of American fun, — quality of a brilliant
intellectuality: the keenness of a rapier, a
teasing subtlety, a contempt for pharisaism and squeamishness,
and above all a fine philosophy. While he has
never lost his sense of the whimsical, the grotesque,
the unusual, he — unfortunately, perhaps —
came oftener to give it the form of pure wit rather
than of cajoling humor. Few Americans know him
as a humorist, because his humor is not built on the
broad, rough lines that are typically American.
It belongs to an older civilization, yet it is jollier
than the English and bolder than the French.
At all times his incomparable wit
and satire has appealed rather to the cultured, and
even the emotional quality of his fiction is frequently
so profound and unusual as to be fully enjoyed only
by the intellectually untrammelled. His writing
was never for those who could only read and feel,
not think.
Another factor against his wider acceptance
has been the infrequency and fragmentary character
of his work, particularly his satire. No sustained
fort in that field has come from him. His satire
was born largely of a transient stimulus, and was
evanescent. Even his short stories are, generally,
but blinding flashes of a moment in a life. He
laughingly ascribes the meagerness of his output to
indolence; but there may be a deeper reason, of which
he is unconscious. What is more dampening than
a seeming lack of appreciation? “Tales
of Soldiers and Civilians” had a disheartening
search for an established publisher, and finally was
brought out by an admiring merchant of San Francisco.
It attracted so much critical attention that its re-publication
was soon undertaken by a regular house.
Had Bierce never produced anything
but these prose tales, his right to a place high in
American letters would nevertheless be secure, and
of all his work, serious or otherwise, here is his
greatest claim to popular and permanent recognition.
No stories for which the Civil War has furnished such
dramatic setting surpass these masterpieces of short
fiction, either in power of description, subtlety of
touch or literary finish. It is deeply to be
regretted that he has not given us more such prose.
W. C. Morrow.