From Samuel L. and
Olivia L. Clemens
to Mary Mason Fairbanks
2 September 1870 • Buffalo, N.Y.
(MS: CSmH, UCCL 00500)
Buffalo, Sept 2.
Dear Mother:
Up to where Shargar & Robert overtake [the ]vessell, on Lord Rothie’s horses, the book is just splendid—but from that to the end it is is pretty flat.1 My! but the first half of it is superb! We just kept our pencils going, marking brilliant & beautiful things—but there was nothing to mark, after the middle. Up to the middle of the book we did so admire & like Robert—& after that we began to dislike & finally ended by despising him for a self-righteous humbug, devoured with egotism.
I guess we hated his grandmother from the first. ‸I did not. I liked her all the time, her heart was all right and what was wrong came of her education— Livy‸ The author was always telling us her goodness, but seldom letting us see any of it.
Shargar was the only character in the book worthy to live & worthy of who was always welcome, & him of him the author gave us just as little as possible, & filled [ him his ]empty pages with the added emptiness of that tiresome Ericson & his dismal “poetry”—[hogwash], I call it.
Oh, yes, & there was Dooble Sanny, an imperial character—but of course he had to die in order to give Robert a chance to air some of his piety., & talk like a blessed Sunday-school book with a marbled cover to [it. ‸ thats not correct— thats not correct—‸
But ] what on earth the author lugged in that inane ‸ity,‸ Miss Lindsay, for, goes clear beyond my comprehension. Page after page, & page after page about that ineffable doughnut, & not even the poor satisfaction of reflecting that Lord Rothie ruined her, after all. ‸how dreadful‸ Hang such an author! a character!
And Miss St. John—well there w never was any interest about her, from the first. And when she concluded that the man she first loved was small potatoes & that ‸that‸ big booby of an Ericson was the mann that completely filled her idea of masculine perfection I just wanted to send her a dose of salts with my compliments.
Mind you, we are not through [ yo yet]—two or three chapters still to read—& that idiot is still hunting for his father. I hoped that as he grew to years of discretion he would eventually appreciate the efforts of a wise [ p Providence ]to get the old man out of the way (seeing that he wasn’t eli very eligible property, take him how you would,)—but no, nothing would do him, clear from in juvenile stupidity to up to mature imbecility but tag around after that old bummer. ‸ scandalous ‸ I do just wonder what he is going to make of him now that he is about to find him. A missionary, likely, along with Rev. De Fleaur Fleuri, & trot him around peddling sentiment to London guttersnipes while he continues his special mission upon earth of reclaiming venerable strumpets and trotting out ‸exhibiting‸ his little wonders at midnight for the astonishment & admiration of chance strangers like the applauding Gordon.
I would make erasures in this letter but it is a hopeless undertaking, I should have to erase the last three pages of the book letter‸it‸— However I know that he is rather ashamed of it because he said that he had left plenty of room for me to say something pleasant—
The last part of the book we have not enjoyed as much as the first part, but the first we did enjoy intensely—
Lovingly yours
Livy—
P. S. Livy is getting along tolerably well, now—takes a n sleeping potion every night & sleeps refreshingly.
Miss Emma Nye is here & is right sick—she cannot go on to Detroit yet awhile, where she is to teach.2
Mrs. Langdon is with us & is reasonably well contented.
I have written four chapters of my new book during the past few days, & I tell you it is going to be a mighty starchy book—will sell, too. But then, considering how I have talked about Robt Faulkener, Falconer, I mean to let you abuse it as much as you want to.
Come & see us whenever you can, & we will run out & see you whenever we can, for we all love you ever so much. Love to all yours household—including Mollie3 always.
Yrs Eldest.
Samℓ.
Explanatory Notes | Textual Commentary
Source text(s):Previous publication:
L4, 187–189; MTMF, 134–37.
Provenance:see Huntington Library in Description of Provenance.
Emendations and textual notes:
the • t th the [‘t’ partly formed; rewritten for clarity]
him his • hims his [revision rewritten for clarity]
hogwash • hog-|wash
it. ‸ thats . . . correct—‸ | [¶] But • it.—| ‸ thats . . . correct—‸ | [¶] But
yo yet • yoet
p Providence • [possibly ‘pProvidence’]
