YALE ALUMNI WEEKLY 267 [Continued from page 266. | the new board. The desire to encourage originality has led to the acceptance of much fiction which is doubtless original, but nothing else—or worse than nothing else. Why the critical essay should not be considered original is hard to under- stand. It may be the worst kind of hack work. But there is as much op- portunity there for a man who is reading into himself, thinking his own thoughts and writing out of himself, as in any other line. If properly handled, it is the best means of doing good work that is open to college men. The explana- tion is hazarded that Lit. editors allow themselves to be influenced somewhat by the contributions that do not appear. Giving the critical essay more space may mean letting in upon the Lit. board a load of wooden stuff which depresses in the mere contemplation of it. But to know that such pieces will be well con- sidered will induce a good deal of excel- lent work by men who are now rather withheld from effort. Halleck’s “ History of English Literature.” Reuben Post Halleck, M.A., Yale ’81, has issued through the American Book Co., a “History of English Literature,” whose aim is “to furnish a concise and interesting text book of the history and development of English literature from the earliest times to the present. Es- pecial attention is paid to literary nmiove- ments, to the essential qualities which differentiate one period from another, and to showing the animating spirit of each age.” The writer in his preface says a long period of teaching English literature and of superintending the in- struction of others in that branch, show the great desirability of connecting the masterpieces of English literature by a general knowledge of the history and de- velopment of the literature of which they form a part. At the end of each chapter is given a list of what are called required readings. There is added to this an optional list of work for further consultation and study. The writer closes his preface as follows: ‘While the writer owes much to the great mas- ters of criticism, he has written this work only after long and careful original study of the authors under discussion. From one source he has received such valuable assistance as to demand emphatic men- tion. which this work has been in preparation, he has had the constant assistance of his wife, a critical student of English litera- ture. To her is due the entire treatment of certain authors in periods that she has made the subject of special study.”