The English Controversy over Realism in Fiction 1885-1895

Extract

It is well known that a heated controversy took place during the eighteen-nineties over the inclusion of fact, brutal fact, in fiction. It is likewise well known that the controversy ended with a partial victory for the “New Realists.” The chief literary historians of the period—W. G. Blaikie-Murdock, Holbrook Jackson, Harold Williams, and Oscar Burdett—agree in dating the change during the early years of the decade. Of these writers, however, Holbrook Jackson alone has indicated—and then only in romantic generalizations—the turbulent clash of ideas which accompanied the transition. In Emile Zola, Novelist and Reformer 1904, Ernest Vizetelly describes with strong partisan feeling the outcry against his father's published translations of Zola's works. But Vizetelly takes us no further than the year 1889, when his father was imprisoned, and he does not deal with the subsequent reaction in England toward tolerance and even sympathy. Accordingly, Vizetelly's account fails to give an adequate appreciation of the important results which followed the controversy over realism, in fixing the chief line of development which English fiction was to take for at least thirty-five years.