George Saintsbury probably had a greater voracity for" literature than
any other man of his time. He devoured books of any and every kind with as much relish as some readers will devour the whole available mass of detective story literature. It is not enough to think of him as an industrious research worker exploring the by-ways of literature, remembering, amassing, and providing volu- minous reference books for the student. He did this con- scientiously and persistently, but he was always dis- tinguishable from the mere scholar by his robust enthu- siasms and a sort of truculence in asserting personal' opinions. In his tastes he was the opposite of a " high brow." He detested subtleties and super-refinements. He had no patience with philosophical criticism, and for that reason fell foul of Signor Croce. He was a master in analysing the technical workmanship of an author,' but he became the " man in the street " full of .virile' prejudices, if he attempted to analyse its spirit. I doubt if any student of literature has ever explored so wide a field and written about it so fully and zestfully.
* * *
Previous page
