ETIDORHPA.
TO THE RECIPIENTS OF THE AUTHOR'S EDITION OF ETIDORHPA:
That so large an edition as 1,299 copies of an expensive book,previously unseen by any subscriber, should have been taken in advanceby reason of a mere announcement, is complimentary to the undersigned;and yet this very confidence occasioned him not a little anxiety. Undersuch circumstances to have failed to give, either in workmanship orsubject-matter, more than was promised in the announcement of Etidorhpa,would have been painfully embarrassing.
Not without deep concern, then, were the returns awaited; for, whileneither pains nor expense were spared to make the book artistically aprize, still, beautiful workmanship and attractive illustrations mayserve but to make more conspicuous other failings. Humiliating indeedwould it have been had the recipients, in a spirit of charity, spokenonly of artistic merit and neat bookwork.
When one not a bookman publishes a book, he treads the danger-line. Whensuch a person, without a great publishing-house behind him, issues abook like Etidorhpa--a book that, spanning space, seemingly embraceswild imaginings and speculation, and intrudes on science andreligion--he invites personal disaster.
That in the case of the Author's Edition of Etidorhpa the reversehappily followed, is evidenced by hundreds of complimentary letters,written by men versed in this or that section wherein the book intrudes;and in a general way the undersigned herein gratefully extends histhanks to all correspondents--thanks for the cordial expressions ofapproval, and for the graceful oversights by critics and correspondents,that none better than he realizes have been extended towards blemishesthat must, to others, be not less apparent than they are to himself.
Since general interest has been awakened in the strange book Etidorhpa,and as many readers are soliciting information concerning its reception,it is not only as a duty, but as a pleasure, that the undersignedreproduces the following abstracts from public print concerning theAuthor's Edition, adding, that as in most cases the reviews were ofgreat length and made by men specially selected for the purpose, thebrief notes are but fragments and simply characteristic of their generaltenor.
The personal references indulged by the critics could not be excisedwithout destroying the value of the criticisms, and the undersigned canoffer no other apology for their introduction than to say that to haveexcluded them would have done an injustice to the writers.
Respectfully, JOHN URI LLOYD.