" Scott, in defence, informed Mr.
Morritt that he had "left the story to flag in the first volume on
purpose. . . . I wished (with what success Heaven knows) to avoid the
ordinary error of novelists, whose first volume is usually their best."
It must be admitted that if Scott wished to make "Waverley" "flag" in the
beginning, he succeeded extremely well,--too well for many modern
readers, accustomed to a leap into the midst of the story. "These
introductory chapters," he observes in a note on the fifth of them, "have
been a good deal censured as tedious and unnecessary; yet there are
circumstances recorded in them which the Author has not been able to
persuade himself to retract or cancel." These "circumstances" are
probably the studies of Waverley, his romantic readings, which are really
autobiographic. Scott was, apparently, seriously of opinion that the
"mental discipline" of a proper classical education would have been
better for himself than his own delightfully desultory studies.
Ballantyne could not see what Waverley's reading had to do with his
adventures and character. Scott persisted in being of another mind. He
himself, writing to Morritt, calls his hero "a sneaking piece of
imbecility;" but he probably started with loftier intentions of
"psychological analysis" than he fulfilled.
Pages:
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131