{"id":"01KG8AM951B7A4X9MC5P225PB9","cid":"bafkreihrtvob2cxpjsuvvtypwfrui625iwczuwog6bjofr5byhjlx2ihsa","type":"chunk","properties":{"end_line":4328,"extracted_at":"2026-01-30T20:48:26.981Z","extracted_by":"structure-extraction-lambda","label":"Chunk 17","source_file":"01KG89J1FFTGRE9J93Z3K29NGY","start_line":4266,"text":"insignia of rank or acknowledged eminence,’ is introduced to the Man of\r\nFancy, who is the giver of the feast. Now, the page having reference to\r\nthis Master Genius, so happily expresses much of what I yesterday wrote,\r\ntouching the coming of the literary Shiloh of America, that I cannot but\r\nbe charmed by the coincidence; especially, when it shows such a parity\r\nof ideas, at least in this one point, between a man like Hawthorne and a\r\nman like me.\r\n\r\nAnd here, let me throw out another conceit of mine touching this\r\nAmerican Shiloh, or Master Genius, as Hawthorne calls him. May it not\r\nbe, that this commanding mind has not been, is not, and never will be,\r\nindividually developed in any one man? And would it, indeed, appear so\r\nunreasonable to suppose, that this great fulness and overflowing may be,\r\nor may be destined to be, shared by a plurality of men of genius?\r\nSurely, to take the very greatest example on record, Shakespeare cannot\r\nbe regarded as in himself the concretion of all the genius of his time;\r\nnor as so immeasurably beyond Marlowe, Webster, Ford, Beaumont, Jonson,\r\nthat these great men can be said to share none of his power? For one, I\r\nconceive that there were dramatists in Elizabeth’s day, between whom and\r\nShakespeare the distance was by no means great. Let any one, hitherto\r\nlittle acquainted with those neglected old authors, for the first time\r\nread them thoroughly, or even read Charles Lamb’s _Specimens_ of them,\r\nand he will be amazed at the wondrous ability of those Anaks of men, and\r\nshocked at this renewed example of the fact, that Fortune has more to do\r\nwith fame than merit,--though without merit, lasting fame there can be\r\nnone.\r\n\r\nNevertheless, it would argue too ill of my country were this maxim to\r\nhold good concerning Nathaniel Hawthorne, a man who already in some few\r\nminds has shed ‘such a light as never illuminates the earth save when a\r\ngreat heart burns as the household fire of a grand intellect.’\r\n\r\nThe words are his,--in the _Select Party_; and they are a magnificent\r\nsetting to a coincident sentiment of my own, but ramblingly expressed\r\nyesterday, in reference to himself. Gainsay it who will; as I now write,\r\nI am Posterity speaking by proxy--and after-times will make it more than\r\ngood, when I declare, that the American who up to the present day has\r\nevinced, in literature, the largest brain with the largest heart, that\r\nman is Nathaniel Hawthorne. Moreover, that whatever Nathaniel Hawthorne\r\nmay hereafter write, _Mosses from an Old Manse_ will be ultimately\r\naccounted his masterpiece. For there is a sure, though secret sign in\r\nsome works which proves the culmination of the powers (only the\r\ndevelopable ones, however) that produced them. But I am by no means\r\ndesirous of the glory of a prophet. I pray Heaven that Hawthorne may yet\r\nprove me an impostor in this prediction. Especially, as I somehow cling\r\nto the strange fancy, that, in all men, hiddenly reside certain\r\nwondrous, occult properties--as in some plants and minerals--which by\r\nsome happy but very rare accident (as bronze was discovered by the\r\nmelting of the iron and brass at the burning of Corinth) may chance to\r\nbe called forth here on earth; not entirely waiting for their better\r\ndiscovery in the more congenial, blessed atmosphere of heaven.\r\n\r\nOnce more--for it is hard to be finite upon an infinite subject, and all\r\nsubjects are infinite. By some people this entire scrawl of mine may be\r\nesteemed altogether unnecessary, inasmuch ‘as years ago’ (they may say)\r\n‘we found out the rich and rare stuff in this Hawthorne, who you now\r\nparade forth, as if only you _yourself_ were the discoverer of this\r\nPortuguese diamond in your literature.’ But even granting all this--and\r\nadding to it, the assumption that the books of Hawthorne have sold by\r\nthe five thousand--what does that signify? They should be sold by the\r\nhundred thousand; and read by the million; and admired by every one who\r\nis capable of admiration.\r\n\r","title":"Chunk 17"},"relationships":[{"peer":"01KG8AJVQAZF49HK19VVYQ1DXW","peer_type":"segment","predicate":"in"},{"peer":"01KG89J1FFTGRE9J93Z3K29NGY","peer_type":"file","predicate":"extractedFrom"},{"peer":"01KG89HMDZKNY753EZE1CJ8HZW","peer_type":"collection","predicate":"collection"},{"peer":"01KG8AM951Y5XQW8CK703NMGDH","peer_type":"chunk","predicate":"prev"},{"peer":"01KG8AM9516RPGY300F1TJKC6Q","peer_type":"chunk","predicate":"next"}],"ver":2,"created_at":"2026-01-30T20:48:31.905Z","ts":"2026-01-30T20:48:38.752Z","edited_by":{"method":"manual","user_id":"01KFF0H3YRP9ZSM033AM0QJ47H"}}