Famous Reviews | Page 7

and their sentiments, they are determined shall be indebted,
for their effect, to nothing but their intrinsic tenderness or elevation.
There is something very noble and conscientious, we will confess, in
this plan of composition; but the misfortune is, that there are passages
in all poems, that can neither be pathetic nor sublime; and that, on these
occasions, a neglect of the embellishments of language is very apt to
produce absolute meanness and insipidity. The language of passion,
indeed, can scarcely be deficient in elevation; and when an author is
wanting in that particular, he may commonly be presumed to have
failed in the truth, as well as in the dignity of his expression. The case,
however, is extremely different with the subordinate parts of a
composition; with the narrative and description, that are necessary to
preserve its connection; and the explanation, that must frequently
prepare us for the great scenes and splendid passages. In these, all the
requisite ideas may be conveyed, with sufficient clearness, by the
meanest and most negligent expressions; and if magnificence or beauty
is ever to be observed in them, it must have been introduced from some
other motive than that of adapting the style to the subject. It is in such
passages, accordingly, that we are most frequently offended with low

and inelegant expressions; and that the language, which was intended
to be simple and natural, is found oftenest to degenerate into mere
slovenliness and vulgarity. It is in vain, too, to expect that the meanness
of those parts may be redeemed by the excellence of others. A poet,
who aims at all at sublimity or pathos, is like an actor in a high tragic
character, and must sustain his dignity throughout, or become
altogether ridiculous. We are apt enough to laugh at the mock-majesty
of those whom we know to be but common mortals in private; and
cannot permit Hamlet to make use of a single provincial intonation,
although it should only be in his conversation with the grave-diggers.
The followers of simplicity are, therefore, at all times in danger of
occasional degradation; but the simplicity of this new school seems
intended to ensure it. Their simplicity does not consist, by any means,
in the rejection of glaring or superfluous ornament--in the substitution
of elegance to splendour, or in that refinement of art which seeks
concealment in its own perfection. It consists, on the contrary, in a very
great degree, in the positive and _bonâ fide_ rejection of art altogether,
and in the bold use of those rude and negligent expressions, which
would be banished by a little discrimination. One of their own authors,
indeed, has very ingeniously set forth (in a kind of manifesto that
preceded one of their most flagrant acts of hostility), that it was their
capital object "to adapt to the uses of poetry, the ordinary language of
conversation among the middling and lower orders of the people."
What advantages are to be gained by the success of this project, we
confess ourselves unable to conjecture. The language of the higher and
more cultivated orders may fairly be presumed to be better than that of
their inferiors: at any rate, it has all those associations in its favour, by
means of which, a style can ever appear beautiful or exalted, and is
adapted to the purposes of poetry, by having been long consecrated to
its use. The language of the vulgar, on the other hand, has all the
opposite associations to contend with; and must seem unfit for poetry
(if there were no other reason), merely because it has scarcely ever
been employed in it. A great genius may indeed overcome these
disadvantages; but we can scarcely conceive that he should court them.
We may excuse a certain homeliness of language in the productions of
a ploughman or a milkwoman; but we cannot bring ourselves to admire
it in an author, who has had occasion to indite odes to his college bell,

and inscribe hymns to the Penates.
But the mischief of this new system is not confined to the depravation
of language only; it extends to the sentiments and emotions, and leads
to the debasement of all those feelings which poetry is designed to
communicate. It is absurd to suppose, that an author should make use
of the language of the vulgar, to express the sentiments of the refined.
His professed object, in employing that language, is to bring his
compositions nearer to the true standard of nature; and his intention to
copy the sentiments of the lower orders, is implied in his resolution to
make use of their style. Now, the different classes of society have each
of them a distinct character, as well as a separate idiom; and the names
of the various passions to which they are