EDY.

It has been observed by an able and popular writer[2] of the present
day, that the following proposition, though very generally received, is
far from being a true one: "Tragedy improves and exalts the nature of
man, while Comedy has a tendency to lower it." Now I profess also to
believe rather in the converse of this proposition, and shall endeavour
in this essay to establish that belief in the minds of my readers, by
the same line of argument that originally induced me to adopt it. With
the generality of persons, who are not in the habit of reasoning upon
subjects of this nature, this question would perhaps be decided, and the
preference awarded to either species of the drama, according to the
peculiar organization of each person: I mean, that those who are
naturally grave, would be more gratified by being affected, and by
having an appeal made to their feelings; while on the other hand, those
who are of a freer temperament, and never dream of brooding over
misfortune, would doubtless prefer being amused. If this remark carries
any weight with it, egotism will be so far necessary to my argument,
that I may be excused for saying thus much:--I suspect myself to be
classed, by nature, under the first of these divisions, and am the more
entitled to a fair hearing, because I argue against feeling and natural
inclination.

[2] Lord John Russell.

Perhaps I shall be able to lay more clearly before the reader, my
reasoning on this interesting as well as important subject, by
considering Tragedy and Comedy respectively, under three distinct
heads:--1st. with respect to the particular sphere or province of each;
2ndly, their plot and characters; and 3rdly, the end or design in view.

First, then, as to the province of Tragedy. Tragedy professes to be a
representation of all the high passions that influence the mind, such as
jealousy, hatred, or revenge; it can have nothing to do with vanity or
any other of the petty passions, for a course of action dependent on
them would appear as insignificant in Tragedy as the passions
themselves. Now, what possible advantage, in the way of improvement, can
be derived from witnessing a display of all the odious passions of our
nature? Some benefit might indeed be derived, if a moral were attached
to Tragedy, but it has no moral (at least very rarely) and for this
simple reason: Tragedy professes to be a speaking picture of life,--and
it is a melancholy but true reflection, tha