IN "The Fool Errant" the author bids good-by not only to the old times of the Renaissance, but also to much of the former Hewlett manner. The novel is a story of 18th century Italy, filled with the tone and color of that period.
It is not a little singular that in commenting upon the probable inspirations of the book, none of the commentators mentioned Beyle. Mr. Richard Holbrook, writing in the Bookman in 1906 on "Some probable sources of Mr. Hewlett's Fool Errant" laid especial stress upon "Don Quixote." He saw in the hero another Don; he saw in Aurelia another Dulcinea, idealized in the brain of the worshipper; he saw in the little peasant Virginia another Sancho Panza.
Still another saw in Strelley of Upcote a Joseph Andrews at large in 18th century Italy, instead of 18th century England. None of the critics seemingly remembered that some years ago Mr. Hewlett wrote an eloquent and enthusiastic introduction to a new English translation of Beyle's "La Chartreuse de Parme," in which he declared it as his sober belief that this novel was the greatest France had produced. It is in this introduction that he speaks of the hero Fabrice as a "divine Italian fool salted over with French wit." Copying this, one might say that Strelley is a divine fool, guided and protected by a dewy innocence almost proof against worldliness. It is no reflection upon Mr. Hewlett's art to surmise that something of Cervantes, something of Fielding, and something of Beyle was in his mind when he conceived this story.
If you take an "innocent abroad" like Joseph Andrews, endow him with the dreams of the Don, and set him atilt against the Italy Beyle loved, you will have something of which "The Fool Errant," is all compact. Only something, however. For to the compound you must add Mr. Hewlett's romanticism, his own unique way of saying things, his own peculiar conception of woman. In comparing the hero of "The Fool Errant" with the heroes of the three acknowledged masterpieces, it is well to remember the attitudes the various creators adopted toward their creations.
Cervantes began by poking fun at his Don and ended by loving him.
Fielding began and ended by laughing at his Joseph.
Beyle, the dry psychologist, throughout maintained the tone of the scientific demonstrator who aimed only at getting at the truth without palliation and without suppression.
Mr. Hewlett, different from all of them, begins and ends by loving his fool. He laughs at him sometimes, but the tears are never far away.
–Maurice Hewlett, Being a Critical Review of His Prose and Poetry [1910]