Famous Reviews | Page 8

subject respectively, have a
signification that varies essentially according to the condition of the
persons to whom they are applied. The love, or grief, or indignation of
an enlightened and refined character, is not only expressed in a
different language, but is in itself a different emotion from the love, or
grief, or anger, of a clown, a tradesman, or a market-wench. The things
themselves are radically and obviously distinct; and the representation
of them is calculated to convey a very different train of sympathies and
sensations to the mind. The question, therefore, comes simply to
be--which of them is the most proper object for poetical imitation? It is
needless for us to answer a question, which the practice of all the world
has long ago decided irrevocably. The poor and vulgar may interest us,
in poetry, by their _situation_; but never, we apprehend, by any
sentiments that are peculiar to their condition, and still less by any
language that is characteristic of it. The truth is, that it is impossible to
copy their diction or their sentiments correctly, in a serious
composition; and this, not merely because poverty makes men
ridiculous, but because just taste and refined sentiment are rarely to be
met with among the uncultivated part of mankind; and a language,
fitted for their expression, can still more rarely form any part of their
"ordinary conversation."
The low-bred heroes, and interesting rustics of poetry, have no sort of
affinity to the real vulgar of this world; they are imaginary beings,
whose characters and language are in contrast with their situation; and
please those who can be pleased with them, by the marvellous, and not
by the nature of such a combination. In serious poetry, a man of the

middling or lower order must necessarily lay aside a great deal of his
ordinary language; he must avoid errors in grammar and orthography;
and steer clear of the cant of particular professions, and of every
impropriety that is ludicrous or disgusting: nay, he must speak in good
verse, and observe all the graces in prosody and collocation. After all
this, it may not be very easy to say how we are to find him out to be a
low man, or what marks can remain of the ordinary language of
conversation in the inferior orders of society. If there be any phrases
that are not used in good society, they will appear as blemishes in the
composition, no less palpably, than errors in syntax or quality; and, if
there be no such phrases, the style cannot be characteristic of that
condition of life, the language of which it professes to have adopted.
All approximation to that language, in the same manner, implies a
deviation from that purity and precision, which no one, we believe,
ever violated spontaneously.
It has been argued, indeed (for men will argue in support of what they
do not venture to practise), that as the middling and lower orders of
society constitute by far the greater part of mankind, so, their feelings
and expressions should interest more extensively, and may be taken,
more fairly than any other, for the standards of what is natural and true.
To this it seems obvious to answer, that the arts that aim at exciting
admiration and delight, do not take their models from what is ordinary,
but from what is excellent; and that our interest in the representation of
any event, does not depend upon our familiarity with the original, but
on its intrinsic importance, and the celebrity of the parties it concerns.
The sculptor employs his art in delineating the graces of Antinous or
Apollo, and not in the representation of those ordinary forms that
belong to the crowd of his admirers. When a chieftain perishes in battle,
his followers mourn more for him, than for thousands of their equals
that may have fallen around him.
After all, it must be admitted, that there is a class of persons (we are
afraid they cannot be called _readers_), to whom the representation of
vulgar manners, in vulgar language, will afford much entertainment.
We are afraid, however, that the ingenious writers who supply the
hawkers and ballad-singers, have very nearly monopolised that
department, and are probably better qualified to hit the taste of their
customers, than Mr. Southey, or any of his brethren, can yet pretend to

be. To fit them for the higher task of original composition, it would not
be amiss if they were to undertake a translation of Pope or Milton into
the vulgar tongue, for the benefit of those children of nature.
There is another disagreeable effect of this affected simplicity, which,
though of less importance than those which have been already noticed,
it may yet be worth while to mention: This is, the extreme difficulty of
supporting