Famous Reviews | Page 2

final judgment or offer
comment and analysis from which we may each form our own opinion.
Probably no hard and fast line can be drawn between the review and the
essay; yet a good volume of criticism can seldom be gleaned from
periodicals. For one thing all journalism, whether consciously or
unconsciously, must contain an appeal to the moment. The reviewer is
introducing new work to his reader, the essayist, or critic proper, may
nearly always assume some familiarity with his subject. The one
hazards prophecy; the other discusses, and illumines, a judgment
already formed, if not established. It is obvious that such reviews as

Macaulay's in the Edinburgh were often permanent contributions to
critical history; while, on the other hand, many ponderous effusions of
the Quarterly are only interesting as a sign of the times.
The fame of a review, however, does not always depend on merit. The
scandalous attacks on the Cockney school, for example, were neither
good literature nor honest criticism. We still pause in wonder before the
streams of virulent personal abuse and unbridled licence in temper
which disgrace the early pages of volumes we now associate with
sound and dignified, if somewhat conventional, utterances on the art of
Literature as viewed from the table-land of authority. And, as
inevitably the most famous reviews are those which attend the birth of
genius, we must include more respectable errors of judgment, if we find
also several remarkable appreciations which prove singular insight.
Following the "early" reviews, whether distinguished for culpable
blindness, private hostility, or rare sympathy, we must depend for our
second main source of material upon that fortunate combination of
circumstances when one of the mighty has been invited to pass
judgment upon his peers. When Scott notices Jane Austen, Macaulay
James Boswell, Gladstone and John Stuart Mill Lord Tennyson, the
article acquires a double value from author and subject. Curiously
enough, as it would seem to us in these days of advertisement, many
such treasures of criticism were published anonymously; and accident
has often aided research in the discovery of their authorship. It is only
too probable that more were written than we have yet on record.
In reviewing, as elsewhere, the growth of professionalism has tended to
level the quality of work. The mass of thoroughly competent criticism
issued to-day has raised enormously the general tone of the press; but
genuine men of letters are seldom employed to welcome, or stifle, a
newcomer; though Meredith, and more frequently Swinburne, have on
occasion elected to pronounce judgment upon the passing generation;
as Mrs. Meynell or Mr. G.K. Chesterton have sometimes said the right
thing about their contemporaries. The days when postcard notices from
Gladstone secured a record in sales are over; and, from whatever
combination of causes, we hear no more of famous reviews.
R. BRIMLEY JOHNSON.
It is with regret that I have found it impossible to print more than a few
of the following reviews complete. The writing of those days was, in

almost every case, extremely prolix, and often irrelevant. It nearly
always makes heavy reading in the originals. The principle of selection
adopted is to retain the most pithy, and attractive, portion of each
article: omitting quotations and the discussion of particular passages. It
therefore becomes necessary to remark--in justice to the writers--that
most of the criticisms here quoted were accompanied by references to
what was regarded by the reviewer as evidence supporting them. Most
of the authors, or books, noticed however, are sufficiently well known
for the reader to have no difficulty in judging for himself.
R. B. J.

OF CRITICISM AND CRITIC
DR. JOHNSON
There is a certain race of men, that either imagine it their duty, or make
it their amusement, to hinder the reception of every work of learning or
genius, who stand as sentinels in the avenues of fame, and value
themselves upon giving ignorance and envy the first notice of a prey.
To these men, who distinguish themselves by the appellation of Critics,
it is necessary for a new author to find some means of recommendation.
It is probable, that the most malignant of these persecutors might be
somewhat softened, and prevailed on, for a short time, to remit their
fury. Having for this purpose considered many expedients, I find in the
records of ancient times, that Argus was lulled by music, and Cerberus
quieted with a sop; and am, therefore, inclined to believe that modern
critics, who, if they have not the eyes, have the watchfulness of Argus,
and can bark as loud as Cerberus, though, perhaps, they cannot bite
with equal force, might be subdued by methods of the same kind. I
have heard that some have been pacified with claret and a supper, and
others laid asleep with the soft notes of flattery.--The