by the most delicate propriety of fentiment and expreffion *. I return to my fubject from a digreffion I cannot repent of. That perfect harmony which ought to fubfift among all the conflituent parts of a dialogue, is a beauty, no lefs rare than confpicuous as to expreffion in particular, were I to give inftances, where, in one or other of the refpects above mentioned, it corresponds not precifely to the characters, paffions, and fentiments, I might from different authors collect volumes. Following therefore the method laid down in the chapter of fentiments, I fhall confine my quotations to the groffer errors, which every writer ought to avoid. And, first, of paffion expreffed in words flowing in an equal courfe without interruption. In the chapter above cited, Corneille is cenfured for the impropriety of his fentiments; and here, for the fake of truth, I am obliged to attack him I i4 The critics feem not perfectly to comprehend the genius of Shakespeare. His plays are defective in the mechanical part; which is lefs the work of genius than of experience, and is not otherwife brought to perfection but by diligently obferving the errors of former compofitions. Shakespeare excels all the ancients and moderns. in knowledge of human nature, and in unfolding even the most obfcure and refined emotions. This is a rare faculty, and of the greatest importance in a dramatic author; and it is that faculty which makes him furpafs all other writers in the comic as well as tragic vein. him a fecond time. Were I to give inftances from that author of the fault under confideration, I might transcribe whole tragedies; for he is no lefs faulty in this particular, than in paffing upon us his own thoughts as a spectator, inftead of the genuine fentiments of paffion. Nor would a comparison between him and Shakespeare, upon the prefent article, redound more to his honour, than the former upon the fentiments. Racine is here less incorrect than Corneille; and from him therefore I fhall gather a few inftances. The firft fhall be the defcription of the fea-monfter in his Phædra, given by Theramene, the com-. panion of Hippolytus. Theramene is represented in terrible agitation, which appears from the following paffage, fo boldly figurative as not to be excused but by violent perturbation of mind: Le ciel avec horreur voit ce monftre fauvage, Yet Theramene gives a long pompous connected description of that event, dwelling upon every minute circumftance, as if he had been only a cool fpectator: A peine nous fortions des portes de Trézéne, Il suivoit tout penfif le chemin de Mycénes, Ses Ses fuperbs courfiers qu'on voyoit autrefois The last speech of Atalide, in the tragedy of Bajazet, of the fame author, is a continued difcourse; and but a faint representation of the violent paffion which forced her to put an end to her own life: Enfin, c'en est donc fait. Et par mes artifices, Infortuné Infortuné Vifir, amis déferpérés, Roxane, venez tous contre moi conjurez, Tourmenter à la fois une amante eperdue; [Elle fe tue. Though works, not authors, are the profeffed fubject of this critical undertaking, I am tempted by the present fpeculation to tranfgrefs once again the limits prefcribed, and to venture a curfory reflection upon that juftly celebrated author, That he is always fenfible, generally correct, never falls low, maintains a moderate degree of dignity, without reaching the fublime, paints delicately the tender affections, but is a ftranger to the genuine language of enthufiaftic or fervid paffion. If, in general, the language of violent paffion ought to be broken and interrupted, foliloquies ought to be so in a peculiar manner : language is intended by nature for fociety; and a man when alone, though he always clothes his thoughts in words, feldom gives his words utterance, unless when prompted by fome ftrong emotion; and even then by starts and intervals only*. Shakefpeare's foliloquies may be justly eftablished as a model; for it is not eafy to conceive any model more perfect of his many incomparable foliloquies, I confine myself to the two following, being different in their manner. * Soliloquies accounted for, Chap. 15. Hamlet. Hamlet. Oh, that this too too folid flesh would melt, Thaw, and refolve itself into a dew! Or that the Everlasting had not fix'd His canon 'gainst self-daughter! O God! O God! Fie on't! O fie! 'tis an unweeded garden, That grows to feed: things rank and gross in nature Hyperion to a fatyr: fo loving to my mother, Let me not think-Frailty, thy name is Woman! With which the followed my poor father's body, (O heav'n! a beast that wants discourse of reason, Would have mourn'd longer-) married with mine uncle, My father's brother; but no more like my father, Ere yet the falt of most unrighteous tears It is not, nor it cannot come to good. But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue. Hamlet, A&t x. Sc. 3. Ford. |