We say to the best
of our recollection, as it behoves us to be careful. We have not
forgotten the snare in which Chamier found himself by asserting in his
preface that his narrative was fact. In _The Naval Officer_ much good
material was thrown away; but we intend to write it over again some
day of these days, and _The Naval Officer_, when corrected, will be
so improved that he may be permitted to stand on the same shelf with
_Pride and Prejudice_ and _Sense and Sensibility_.[A]
[Footnote A: The improvement was never made.--ED.]
"The confounded licking we received for our first attempts in the
critical notices is probably well known to the reader--at all events
we have not forgotten it. Now, with some, this severe castigation of
their first offence would have had the effect of their never offending
again; but we felt that our punishment was rather too severe; it
produced indignation instead of contrition, and we determined to write
again in spite of all the critics in the universe; and in the due
course of nine months we produced _The King's Own_. In _The Naval
Officer_ we had sowed all our wild oats; we had _paid off_ those who
had ill-treated us, and we had no further personality to indulge in.
_The King's Own_, therefore, was wholly fictitious in characters, in
plot, and in events, as have been its successors. _The King's Own_ was
followed by _Newton Forster, Newton Forster_ by _Peter Simple_. These
are _all_ our productions.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25