emotional and critical sides of his nature, first one, then the other,
getting the upper hand, and too seldom fusing till the result has the
mellowness of full achievement. One can even tell the nature of one's
readers, by their preference for the work which reveals more of this
side than of that. My early work was certainly more emotional than
critical. But from 1901 came nine years when the critical was, in the
main, holding sway. From 1910 to 1918 the emotional again struggled for
the upper hand; and from that time on there seems to have been something
of a "dead beat." So the conflict goes, by what mysterious tides
promoted, I know not.

An author must ever wish to discover a hapless member of the Public who,
never yet having read a word of his writing, would submit to the ordeal
of reading him right through from beginning to end. Probably the effect
could only be judged through an autopsy, but in the remote case of
survival, it would interest one so profoundly to see the differences,
if any, produced in that reader's character or outlook over life. This,
however, is a consummation which will remain devoutly to be wished, for
there is a limit to human complaisance. One will never know the exact
measure of one's infecting power; or whether, indeed, one is not just a
long soporific.

A writer they say, should not favouritize among his creations; but
then a writer should not do so many things that he does. This writer,
certainly, confesses to having favourites, and of his novels so far be
likes best: The Forsyte Series; "The Country House"; "Fraternity"; "The
Dark Flower"; and "Five Tales"; believing these to be the works which
most fully achieve fusion of seer with thing seen, most subtly disclose
the individuality of their author, and best reveal such of truth as has
been vouchsafed to him. JOHN GALSWORTHY.