own sensible words, 'It is useless to criticise what nobody
reads.' It was indeed the expressed opinion of a contemporary called Pot
that _Irene_ was the finest tragedy of modern times; but on this judgment
of Pot's being made known to Johnson, he was only heard to mutter, 'If
Pot says so, Pot lies,' as no doubt he did.

Johnson's Latin Verses have not escaped the condemnation of scholars.
Whose have? The true mode of critical approach to copies of Latin verse
is by the question--How bad are they? Croker took the opinion of the
Marquess Wellesley as to the degree of badness of Johnson's Latin
Exercises. Lord Wellesley, as became so distinguished an Etonian, felt
the solemnity of the occasion, and, after bargaining for secrecy, gave it
as his opinion that they were all very bad, but that some perhaps were
worse than others. To this judgment I have nothing to add.

As a writer of English prose, Johnson has always enjoyed a great, albeit
a somewhat awful reputation. In childish memories he is constrained to
be associated with dust and dictionaries, and those provoking obstacles
to a boy's reading--'long words.' It would be easy to select from
Johnson's writings numerous passages written in that essentially vicious
style to which the name Johnsonese has been cruelly given; but the
searcher could not fail to find many passages guiltless of this charge.
The characteristics of Johnson's prose style are colossal good sense,
though with a strong sceptical bias, good humour, vigorous language, and
movement from point to point, which can only be compared to the measured
tread of a well-drilled company of soldiers. Here is a passage from the
preface to Shakspeare:

'Notes are often necessary, but they are necessary evils. Let him
that is yet unacquainted with the powers of Shakspeare, and who
desires to feel the highest pleasure that the drama can give, read
every play from the first scene to the last, with utter negligence of
all his commentators. When his fancy is once on the wing, let it not
stoop at correction or explanation. When his attention is strongly
engaged, let it disdain alike to turn aside to the name of Theobald
and of Pope. Let him read on, through brightness and obscurity,
through integrity and corruption; let him preserve his comprehension
of the dialogue and his interest in the fable. And when the pleasures
of novelty have ceased, let him attempt exactness and read t