advised "Do not overleok Theresz if you have like Schnitzler
before.” Bruce Gould asserted, “We never read anything by
Schnitzler which didn't seem good. In Theresa Schnitzler has
surpassed himself,” (1) others claimed; "It is a strong, pain-
ful and most artistically distinguished novel, a book which will
eventually add even to Herr Schnitzler's high reputation as a
leader of continental novelists;” (2) „It is an excellent book;
WIt is a.translation from abroad which none of the disorim ging
’t splendid novel.” (5) But we
readers will care to miss;” (4)
"Theresa bored us hofoundly,
must face such statements as these:
but we aren’t a Schnitzler fan and never were, (6)
"Schnitzler
has an unlovely nood. Theresa is a tale of sordid underourrents
in whichRity is harohly absent. The pattern of the chapters
hold to one (gloomy), morose fora - Theresa loses a position and
gains another lower. Schnitzler has floundered with his theories.
The novel does not create reality.” (7) Let us compare this last
strument with this one, "Skilfully told story, notable for reality
of all Capacters, yet possesins a certain monotony of tone,” (8)
with this one, "Weile Theresa is often dull and repetitious, de-
spite its economy of detail, no one can read it without feeling
that the portrait is true to type without being harrowing or en-
"Too minute
certaining." (9) and with Marian Gerber’s review,
realism. It belong to the category of good reporting rather than
"It is a
that of fine literature." (10) To this C.B. replies,
morbid depressing tale, but it is to be commended for its literary
"nothing can
ouslity." (11) Ludwig Levisohn writes from Germany,
exceed tho smouth firm beauty of Schnitzler's style and technique,
and in answer to all Hjections G.L. declares, "Schnitzler has not
cluttered this powerful novel with one line that is uneasental.
It is (xquisitely human and it is pathetically real. Seedom have
I ever read a novel that has made so laating an impression on
me. (13) Œefore Theresa appearedoritios had compared each new
work of Schnitzler's with a preceding one but now Theresa is com-
pared not only with other works by Schnitzler himself but also
New York Evening Post. Sept. 26, 1928
1.
Courant (Kartford, Sonn.), Oct. 14, 1928.
Vindientor (Youngstown, Ohio), Nov. 3, 1928,
World-Herald (Omaha, Nebraska), Oct. 7,
1928.
Newe (Detroit, Mich.), Oct. 21, 1928, by Father D.McIntyre.
ter (Des Moines), Oct. 10. 1928.
Regimung des Königl.
Frooklyn Lägle. Oct. 10, 1928, by Ailan K. Keller.
Imerican Mercury (New York City), Dec., 1929.
8.
firmés
(Los Angeles, Cal.), Oct. 28, 1928.
Fluch
(Ashville, N.C.), Dec. 30, 1928.
10.
Gews (St. Paul, Minn.), Oct. 26, 1928.
11.
dew York Herald Tribune, Aug. 19, 1928, p 7.
12.
13.) Press (Savannah, Gä.7, Oct. 6, 1928.
before.” Bruce Gould asserted, “We never read anything by
Schnitzler which didn't seem good. In Theresa Schnitzler has
surpassed himself,” (1) others claimed; "It is a strong, pain-
ful and most artistically distinguished novel, a book which will
eventually add even to Herr Schnitzler's high reputation as a
leader of continental novelists;” (2) „It is an excellent book;
WIt is a.translation from abroad which none of the disorim ging
’t splendid novel.” (5) But we
readers will care to miss;” (4)
"Theresa bored us hofoundly,
must face such statements as these:
but we aren’t a Schnitzler fan and never were, (6)
"Schnitzler
has an unlovely nood. Theresa is a tale of sordid underourrents
in whichRity is harohly absent. The pattern of the chapters
hold to one (gloomy), morose fora - Theresa loses a position and
gains another lower. Schnitzler has floundered with his theories.
The novel does not create reality.” (7) Let us compare this last
strument with this one, "Skilfully told story, notable for reality
of all Capacters, yet possesins a certain monotony of tone,” (8)
with this one, "Weile Theresa is often dull and repetitious, de-
spite its economy of detail, no one can read it without feeling
that the portrait is true to type without being harrowing or en-
"Too minute
certaining." (9) and with Marian Gerber’s review,
realism. It belong to the category of good reporting rather than
"It is a
that of fine literature." (10) To this C.B. replies,
morbid depressing tale, but it is to be commended for its literary
"nothing can
ouslity." (11) Ludwig Levisohn writes from Germany,
exceed tho smouth firm beauty of Schnitzler's style and technique,
and in answer to all Hjections G.L. declares, "Schnitzler has not
cluttered this powerful novel with one line that is uneasental.
It is (xquisitely human and it is pathetically real. Seedom have
I ever read a novel that has made so laating an impression on
me. (13) Œefore Theresa appearedoritios had compared each new
work of Schnitzler's with a preceding one but now Theresa is com-
pared not only with other works by Schnitzler himself but also
New York Evening Post. Sept. 26, 1928
1.
Courant (Kartford, Sonn.), Oct. 14, 1928.
Vindientor (Youngstown, Ohio), Nov. 3, 1928,
World-Herald (Omaha, Nebraska), Oct. 7,
1928.
Newe (Detroit, Mich.), Oct. 21, 1928, by Father D.McIntyre.
ter (Des Moines), Oct. 10. 1928.
Regimung des Königl.
Frooklyn Lägle. Oct. 10, 1928, by Ailan K. Keller.
Imerican Mercury (New York City), Dec., 1929.
8.
firmés
(Los Angeles, Cal.), Oct. 28, 1928.
Fluch
(Ashville, N.C.), Dec. 30, 1928.
10.
Gews (St. Paul, Minn.), Oct. 26, 1928.
11.
dew York Herald Tribune, Aug. 19, 1928, p 7.
12.
13.) Press (Savannah, Gä.7, Oct. 6, 1928.