CHAPTER V.
SCOTT AS A CRITIC OF HIS OWN WORK Lack of dogmatism about his own work--Harmony between his talents and his tastes--His conviction of the value of spontaneity and abundance--Merits of a rapid meter--Greater care necessary in verse writing a reason why he turned to prose--His attitude in regard to revision--Modesty about his own work--His opinion of the popular judgment--Importance of novelty--Rivalry with Byron--Scott's attempts to keep ahead of his imitators--Devices to secure novelty--His resolution to write history--Historical motives of his novels--His comments on the use of historical material--His verdict in regard to his descriptive abilities and methods--Lack of emphasis on the ethical aspect of his work--His judgment on the position of the novel in literature.
"Scott is invariably his own best critic," says Mr.Andrew Lang.[348] Of this Scott was not himself in the least convinced, and when we recall how, to please his printer, James Ballantyne, he tacked on a last scene to _Rokeby_, resuscitated the dead Athelstane in _Ivanhoe_, and eliminated the main motive of _St.Ronan's Well_, we wish he had been more uniformly inclined to trust his own critical judgment.
He never scheduled the qualities of his own genius.

A man who could sincerely say what he did about literary immortality would not be apt to develop any dogma in regard to his artistic achievement.

"Let me please my own generation," he said, "and let those that come after us judge of their taste and my performances as they please; the anticipation of their neglect or censure will affect me very little."[349] His opinions about his own work are to be deduced largely from casual remarks scattered through his letters and journals.

His introductions to his novels, in the _Opus Magnum_, are valuable sources, however, and the "Epistle" preceding _The Fortunes of Nigel_ is a mine of material, though, unlike the later introductions, it was written "according to the trick," when he was still preserving his anonymity.

We have an article which he wrote for the _Quarterly_ on two of his own books, the review of _Tales of My Landlord_.[350] His criticism of the work of other people is also very helpful in this connection, since from it we may learn what qualities he wished to find in poetry and in the novel, as well as in history, biography, and criticism, the fields in which he did much, though less famous work.
The student of his criticism is struck at once by the fact that the qualities which Scott particularly admired in literature were those for which he was himself preeminent.