, to the honour of our own country I must add, that I think
Mr. Dryden's Ode on St. Cecilia's Day inferior to no composition of this
kind. Its chief beauty consists in adapting the numbers most happily to
the variety of the occasion. Those by which he has chosen to express
majesty, (viz.)

Assumes the God,
Affects to nod,
And seems to shake the spheres,

are chosen in the following ode, because the subject of it is great.

For the more harmony likewise, I chose the frequent return of rhyme; which
laid me under great difficulties. But difficulties overcome give grace and
pleasure. Nor can I account for the pleasure of rhyme in general (of which
the moderns are too fond) but from this truth.

But then the writer must take care that the difficulty is overcome. That
is, he must make rhyme consistent with as perfect sense, and expression,
as could be expected if he was free from that shackle. Otherwise, it gives
neither grace to the work, nor pleasure to the reader, nor, consequently,
reputation to the poet.

To sum the whole: ode should be peculiar, but not strained; moral, but not
flat; natural, but not obvious; delicate, but not affected; noble, but not
ambitious; full, but not obscure; fiery, but not mad; thick, but not
loaded in its numbers, which should be most harmonious, without the least
sacrifice of expression, or of sense. Above all, in this, as in every work
of genius, somewhat of an original spirit should be, at least attempted;
otherwise the poet, whose character disclaims mediocrity, makes a
secondary praise his ultimate ambition; which has something of a
contradiction in it. Originals only have true life, and differ as much
from the best imitations, as men from the most animated pictures of them.
Nor is what I say at all inconsistent with a due deference for the great
standards of antiquity; nay, that very deference is an argument for it,
for doubtless their example is on my side in this matter. And we should
rather imitate their example in the general motives, and fundamental
methods of their working, than in their works themselves. This is a
distinction, I think, not hitherto made, and a distinction of consequence.
For the first may make us their equals; the second must pronounce us their
inferiors even in our utmost success. But the first of these prizes is not
so readily taken by the moderns; as valuables too massy for easy carriage
are not so liable to the thief.

The anc