FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333  
334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   >>   >|  
d good scenes but not a good play; but Amicus gathered that he would not permit anybody else to pass such a verdict with impunity, for when he himself once ventured to say something derogatory of _Hamlet_, Smith replied, "Yes, but still _Hamlet_ is full of fine passages." This opinion of Shakespeare was of course common to most of the great men of last century. They were not so much insensible to the poet's genius as perplexed by it. His plays were full of imagination, dramatic power, natural gifts of every kind--that was admitted; but then they seemed wild, unregulated, savage--even "drunken savage," to use Voltaire's expression; they were magnificent, but they were not poetry, for they broke every rule of the art, and poetry after all was an art. And so we find Addison at the beginning of last century writing on the greatest English poets and leaving the name of Shakespeare out; and we find Charles James Fox, a true lover of letters, telling Reynolds at the close of the century that Shakespeare's reputation would have stood higher if he had never written _Hamlet_. Smith thought Shakespeare had more than ten times the dramatic genius of Dryden, but Dryden had more of the poetic art. He praised Dryden for rhyming his plays, and said--as Pope and Voltaire used also to say--that it was nothing but laziness that prevented our tragic poets from writing in rhyme like those of France. "Dryden," said he, "had he possessed but a tenth part of Shakespeare's dramatic genius, would have brought rhyming tragedies into fashion here as they were in France, and then the mob would have admired them just as much as they then pretended to despise them." Beattie's _Minstrel_ he would not allow to be called a poem at all, because it had no plan, no beginning, middle, or end. It was only a series of verses, some of them, however, he admitted, very happy. As for Pope's translation of the _Iliad_, he said, "They do well to call it Pope's _Iliad_, for it is not Homer's _Iliad_. It has no resemblance to the majesty and simplicity of the Greek." He read over to Amicus Milton's _L'Allegro_ and _Il Penseroso_, and explained the respective beauties of each; but he added that all the rest of Milton's short poems were trash. He could not imagine what made Johnson praise the poem on the death of Mrs. Killigrew, and compare it with _Alexander's Feast_. Johnson's praise of it had induced him to read the poem over and with attention twice, but he cou
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333  
334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Shakespeare

 

Dryden

 

genius

 

Hamlet

 

century

 
dramatic
 

savage

 

admitted

 
Milton
 

praise


Johnson
 
beginning
 

rhyming

 

France

 
Amicus
 

writing

 

poetry

 

Voltaire

 

middle

 
brought

tragedies

 

possessed

 
fashion
 

Beattie

 

Minstrel

 

despise

 
pretended
 

admired

 
called
 
imagine

beauties

 

attention

 
induced
 

Killigrew

 

compare

 

Alexander

 

respective

 

explained

 

translation

 
series

verses

 

Allegro

 

Penseroso

 

simplicity

 

tragic

 
resemblance
 

majesty

 

telling

 

insensible

 
common