HUMOROUS ARTICLES.

IN reading over with care our college papers we find, as a general rule, that the various themes which meet our eyes apply directly or indirectly to college rules, college customs. This certainly ought to be expected, from the nature of these papers. I do not wish even to argue that this is not perfectly right; but I should like to call attention to the fact that a certain class of articles are not as a general rule popular, although their character might at first lead one to expect otherwise. I refer to humorous productions.

In the first place, a humorous article to be popular must of course have reference to some circumstances interesting to its readers. Now the leading newspapers of the present day are full of such articles to a greater or less extent. The writers of these articles, having greater experience than the contributors to college papers, are more capable of writing so as to please their readers; further, they have a greater field of operation, since they are not confined to productions which have their application in any one direction. Besides, newspaper contributors have a much less cultivated class of readers to address; as a general rule but few of the humorous writings of the daily papers are pleasing to the more cultivated classes of society. It is true such writing pleases the majority of people, but in college the greater number of the students make some pretension to culture, while outside it is the cultured who are in the minority. A humorous article to be worthy of the name must be well carried out, and unless those who attempt to write them have considerable experience they cannot expect to succeed. Doubtless, many not connected with the University take more interest in these humorous productions than the undergraduates themselves, simply because they suppose that these articles apply to some circumstances, some event, which happened in college life. The editors of the college papers will not, I think, advise any one to write humorous articles; in fact, we once heard an editor remark, when asked in regard to the style of an article about to be written, "Anything but a humorous article."

Again, humor, to be pleasing, should be natural, should spring forth of its own accord. Nothing is more displeasing than a labored production, especially if it aims to be witty. True wit resides in the man, and is not the result of education; it is the gift of nature. The more manifest reasons that the so-called funny writings are not favorably received in college journals is, because they appear to have no point to them; or if they have their applications, they are so poorly carried out, either by inability on the part of the writer or by his seemingly forgetting his primary object, that the interest awakened at the beginning gradually fails. It is difficult for the college writer to find worthy objects for his wit, and nearly as difficult to carry through that wit consistently to the end. Since the readers of the college journals are for the most part educated, and since witty writings to please such a class are very hard to compose, the contributors to the college journals, after they have learned by experience the difficult nature of such productions, cease to attempt them, believing they are impracticable.

Among young contributors writings of superior merit in the use of language cannot be expected; style is formed by long-continued practice; and since witty productions depend to a considerable extent upon the use of language and upon style, it cannot be expected that those who are but tyros in the art of writing will find their forte in humor.

"Witticisms generally owe much of their effect to the occasion which produces them, and therefore, like volatile vapors, when we attempt to analyze them they evaporate. The glow-worm ceases to shine when subjected to dissection."

C. J. U., Jr.