with POPE, to whose rising celebrity he soon became too jealously
alive.[B] It was more tenderly, but not less keenly, felt by the Spanish
artist CASTILLO, a man distinguished by every amiable disposition. He was
the great painter of Seville; but when some of his nephew MURILLO'S
paintings were shown to him, he stood in meek astonishmont before them,
and turning away, he exclaimed with a sigh--"_Ya murio Castillo_!"
Castillo is no more! Returning home, the stricken genius relinquished his
pencil, and pined away, in hopelessness. The same occurrence happened to
PIETRO PERUGINO, the master of Raphael, whose general character as a
painter was so entirely eclipsed by his far-renowned scholar; yet, while
his real excellences in the ease of his attitudes and the mild grace of
his female countenances have been passed over, it is probable that
Raphael himself might have caught from them his first feelings of ideal
beauty.
[Footnote A: The plain motive of all these dislikes is still more amusing,
as given in this couplet of the same poem:--
"If with such genius heaven has blest 'em,
Have I not reason to detest 'em."--ED.]
[Footnote B: See article on Pope and Addison in "Quarrels of Authors." ]
CHAPTER XIV.
Want of mutual esteem among men of genius often originates in a deficiency
of analogous ideas.--It is not always envy or jealousy which induces men
of genius to undervalue each other.
Among men of genius, that want of mutual esteem, usually attributed to
envy or jealousy, often originates in a deficiency of analogous ideas, or
of sympathy, in the parties. On this principle, several curious phenomena
in the history of genius may be explained.
Every man of genius has a manner of his own; a mode of thinking and a
habit of style, and usually decides on a work as it approximates or varies
from his own. When one great author depreciates another, his depreciation
has often no worse source than his own taste. The witty Cowley despised
the natural Chaucer; the austere classical Boileau the rough sublimity of
Creibillon; the refining Marivaux the familiar Moliere. Fielding ridiculed
Richardson, whose manner so strongly contrasted with his own; and
Richardson contemned Fielding, and declared he would not last. Cumberland
escaped a fit of unforgiveness, not living to read his own character by
Bishop Watson, whose logical head tried the lighter elegancies of that
polished man by his own nervous genius, destitute o
|