{"id":"01KG8AKC4FKEVEM9EAZT6VQ9Z9","cid":"bafkreihioki3xncuxusj6suwgin73oq4thy3xq6sdqsrghso7psdhaogha","type":"chunk","properties":{"end_line":10400,"extracted_at":"2026-01-30T20:47:57.726Z","extracted_by":"structure-extraction-lambda","label":"Chunk 1","source_file":"01KG89J1JMR8XVKPA0G8ADAPC4","start_line":10322,"text":"CHAPTER XLIV.\r\n\r\nIN WHICH THE LAST THREE WORDS OF THE LAST CHAPTER ARE MADE THE TEXT OF\r\nDISCOURSE, WHICH WILL BE SURE OF RECEIVING MORE OR LESS ATTENTION FROM\r\nTHOSE READERS WHO DO NOT SKIP IT.\r\n\r\n\r\n\"Quite an original:\" A phrase, we fancy, rather oftener used by the\r\nyoung, or the unlearned, or the untraveled, than by the old, or the\r\nwell-read, or the man who has made the grand tour. Certainly, the sense\r\nof originality exists at its highest in an infant, and probably at its\r\nlowest in him who has completed the circle of the sciences.\r\n\r\nAs for original characters in fiction, a grateful reader will, on\r\nmeeting with one, keep the anniversary of that day. True, we sometimes\r\nhear of an author who, at one creation, produces some two or three score\r\nsuch characters; it may be possible. But they can hardly be original in\r\nthe sense that Hamlet is, or Don Quixote, or Milton's Satan. That is to\r\nsay, they are not, in a thorough sense, original at all. They are novel,\r\nor singular, or striking, or captivating, or all four at once.\r\n\r\nMore likely, they are what are called odd characters; but for that, are\r\nno more original, than what is called an odd genius, in his way, is.\r\nBut, if original, whence came they? Or where did the novelist pick them\r\nup?\r\n\r\nWhere does any novelist pick up any character? For the most part, in\r\ntown, to be sure. Every great town is a kind of man-show, where the\r\nnovelist goes for his stock, just as the agriculturist goes to the\r\ncattle-show for his. But in the one fair, new species of quadrupeds are\r\nhardly more rare, than in the other are new species of characters--that\r\nis, original ones. Their rarity may still the more appear from this,\r\nthat, while characters, merely singular, imply but singular forms so to\r\nspeak, original ones, truly so, imply original instincts.\r\n\r\nIn short, a due conception of what is to be held for this sort of\r\npersonage in fiction would make him almost as much of a prodigy there,\r\nas in real history is a new law-giver, a revolutionizing philosopher, or\r\nthe founder of a new religion.\r\n\r\nIn nearly all the original characters, loosely accounted such in works\r\nof invention, there is discernible something prevailingly local, or of\r\nthe age; which circumstance, of itself, would seem to invalidate the\r\nclaim, judged by the principles here suggested.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, if we consider, what is popularly held to entitle\r\ncharacters in fiction to being deemed original, is but something\r\npersonal--confined to itself. The character sheds not its characteristic\r\non its surroundings, whereas, the original character, essentially such,\r\nis like a revolving Drummond light, raying away from itself all round\r\nit--everything is lit by it, everything starts up to it (mark how it is\r\nwith Hamlet), so that, in certain minds, there follows upon the adequate\r\nconception of such a character, an effect, in its way, akin to that\r\nwhich in Genesis attends upon the beginning of things.\r\n\r\nFor much the same reason that there is but one planet to one orbit, so\r\ncan there be but one such original character to one work of invention.\r\nTwo would conflict to chaos. In this view, to say that there are more\r\nthan one to a book, is good presumption there is none at all. But for\r\nnew, singular, striking, odd, eccentric, and all sorts of entertaining\r\nand instructive characters, a good fiction may be full of them. To\r\nproduce such characters, an author, beside other things, must have seen\r\nmuch, and seen through much: to produce but one original character, he\r\nmust have had much luck.\r\n\r\nThere would seem but one point in common between this sort of phenomenon\r\nin fiction and all other sorts: it cannot be born in the author's\r\nimagination--it being as true in literature as in zoology, that all life\r\nis from the egg.\r\n\r\nIn the endeavor to show, if possible, the impropriety of the phrase,\r\n_Quite an Original_, as applied by the barber's friends, we have, at\r\nunawares, been led into a dissertation bordering upon the prosy, perhaps\r\nupon the smoky. If so, the best use the smoke can be turned to, will be,\r\nby retiring under cover of it, in good trim as may be, to the story.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r","title":"Chunk 1"},"relationships":[{"peer":"01KG8AJNPWJZG1C980YZX0C673","peer_type":"chapter","predicate":"in"},{"peer":"01KG89J1JMR8XVKPA0G8ADAPC4","peer_type":"file","predicate":"extractedFrom"},{"peer":"01KG89HMDZKNY753EZE1CJ8HZW","peer_type":"collection","predicate":"collection"}],"ver":1,"created_at":"2026-01-30T20:48:02.191Z","ts":"2026-01-30T20:48:02.191Z","edited_by":{"method":"manual","user_id":"01KFF0H3YRP9ZSM033AM0QJ47H"}}