I did not invite you."

Many such mortifications arose in the course of their intimacy, to be
sure, but few more laughable than when the newspapers had tacked them
together as the pedant and his flatterer in Love's Labour's Lost. Dr.
Goldsmith came to his friend, fretting and foaming, and vowing vengeance
against the printer, etc., till Mr. Johnson, tired of the bustle, and
desirous to think of something else, cried out at last, "Why, what
would'st thou have, dear Doctor! who the plague is hurt with all this
nonsense? and how is a man the worse, I wonder, in his health, purse, or
character, for being called Holofernes?" "I do not know," replies the
other, "how you may relish being called Holofernes, but I do not like at
least to play Goodman Dull."

Dr. Johnson was indeed famous for disregarding public abuse. When the
people criticised and answered his pamphlets, papers, etc., "Why, now,
these fellows are only advertising my book," he would say; "it is surely
better a man should be abused than forgotten." When Churchill nettled
him, however, it is certain he felt the sting, or that poet's works would
hardly have been left out of the edition. Of that, however, I have no
right to decide; the booksellers, perhaps, did not put Churchill on their
list. I know Mr. Johnson was exceedingly zealous to declare how very
little he had to do with the selection. Churchill's works, too, might
possibly be rejected by him upon a higher principle; the highest, indeed,
if he was inspired by the same laudable motive which made him reject
every authority for a word in his dictionary that could only be gleaned
from writers dangerous to religion or morality. "I would not," said he,
"send people to look for words in a book, that by such a casual seizure
of the mind might chance to mislead it for ever." In consequence of this
delicacy, Mrs. Montague once observed, "That were an angel to give the
imprimatur, Dr. Johnson's works were among those very few which would not
be lessened by a line." That such praise from such a lady should delight
him, is not strange; insensibility in a case like that must have been the
result alone of arrogance acting on stupidity. Mr. Johnson had indeed no
dislike to the commendations which he knew he deserved. "What signifies
protesting so against flattery!" would he cry; "when a person speaks well
of one, it must be either true or false, you know; if true, let us
rejoice in his good opinion; if he lies,