The National Register. — London, England, 1808-02-21 00:00:00

; ~ t i L i f FEB. 21. with lively s witnent, and so►ne honed English wit, instead of antithese , and puns. An attempt of this kind might tend to cure a vitiated taste ; and even the n►any (who are oftener al lured by the decorations, than by the sterling merit of the piece) would soon find a higher relish in the genuine English comedy, than in all the tricks of the mechanist, or the most brilliant d'wurre of the scene-painter. TIIE DKAM ATI c DETECTOR. No. 11. Impiger, irarundus, inexarabilis, acer ! In these times, when the spirit of chivalry is almost extinct, and a single warrior no longer ventures to storm an enchanted castle, there is some boldness in attacking an enemy who is not only armed with powerful weapons of defence, but guaidal by the talisman of public favour. in assailing The E.iaminer we have, therefore, undertaken a s erviceec of danger, and opposed to the talents which glitter e shall be fighting like the knights in Mr. Skitlington's Sleeping Beauty, tignimt thunder ant lightning. But if the enchanter employ his art to the pur rases of mischief, we will try to sound the itro, by the blast of which his magic influence may fall. and to rescue all the un happy men and distressed damsels who for so long a time have hem beneath his oppression. The theatrical censor, in The Examiner,•annottnces himself to be the same who formerly brandished the critical quill in The ,zeros. In that paper he did not content himself with lashing these writers who came regularly under his review, hut scarcely ever passed a week without introducing the names of some three or four authors, whom hr seemed to consider as the vicegerents of dullness upon earth. We are sorry to mind, that in The k.;.r amirier he pursues a line of conduct exactly similar, and that the same people are introduced by head and shoulders, nicest!, that then nuty be abased. Our impartial renders will he a lit tle surprised. when they are informed, that among those who are stigmatized as the greatest blockheads tbut ever insulted the taste of a nation, are the authors of the Dramatist, and of the Jew and Daelar. That Mr. Reynolds has too {Men dressed comedy in a harlequin jacket, and that Mr. {Malin has tisnally spread pints, as thick its duck-weed, over the waters of his dra• math. Helicon, ais ate perfectly ready to confess : But that men who have done so much for the relaxation of rigid muscles, are to he considered as blockheads we never ran allow : and we think that, eveu it' they were duller than the fat weed on !settle's harf, a Critic could have no right to abuse them, except when their a orks were regularly the subjects of his animadversion. But this v.:Weal-in has set up Shakespeare and Cortgreve as the north poles of _miss, and the modern authors as their diame trical oppositvs : and in praportion as any writer approaches ta the staudarl point at either extreme, his literary latitude 411 d loilettuds. are calt•olated by this theatrical philosopher. — There is to subject, however apparently unconnected with the mimes of the raolern authors, that is not immediately coupled a its au ins er.iye agaioq their ahsurdities: and if all his readers ttre like us, they :met by this time he heartily tired °No. sounds. , Cherry, and Reynolds, Cherry, Keynold , ,, and Oindio, with which the changes:ire so uni farmly rung up.m our ears. If the Critic has occasion to speak of the nevi val-' at Drury Lane, he tells us that the other house is al ways in she e xtremes of Shakespeare and Dibdin. 1f he mentions air. Kite tholles•s opi;rs, which he very deservedly condemns. he tells us that Me. CisiTy must be in " a happy •• maraca, of bispiration•' to compose any thing as good: and though the unfortunate frequency of bad plays gives him fre queut opportunities of fair censure, he cannot be Comfortable unless he drags the Nair authors, risen when they are nuoircnd beg, before the dreadful tribunal of criticism lie is not con tent with taking his gun, like a regular sportsman, and shoot ing the game that starts hefore him ; hut converts every Sunday into Rhrove- tide. and brings the poor finis from their peaceful roosts, merely that he may have the pleasure of breaking their legs and wings. Besides we are not sure that the privileges of a theatrical Critic are quite as eXtensive as this writer would make them. Every body who sees a new play, and thinks it stupid, has an sinooutited Het, publicly or privately, to say that he thinks so : hut we do not conceive that any body has a' right to call its author stupid : because a very clever man may write a very Ptupid play : and censure, when transferred from the individual piece to the general capacity which produced that piece, is no loagor criticism, but personality. This we hold to he the case ofjustice, even it' the author attacked were really a blockhead ; hat when a man has actually produced one good piece, he hits proved himself ingenious, and though his THE NATIONAL REGISTER. 1,25 subsequent efforts may merit individual condemnation, he caa never deserve to be called a fool ou the whole. From time to time, as occasion may require, we shall point out the most material defects of the theatrical Examiner. The Critic has great talents, but, paradoxical as the assertion may appear, those very talents are likely to prevent him from suer attaining perfection in this pursuit. When his mind is turned on comedy, he has too much wit himself to do justice to the wit of others : awl when he has to speak of tragedy, be ap pears to stifle that poetical feeling which alone can enable ft. man to criticise with justice. When he writes on comedy he should therefore remember, like the swift runner in the fairy tale, to tie himself, lest he move too nimbi : and, when be investigates a tragic performance, be should not suffer cold cau tion to remain on guard at the avenues of his heart. FINE ARTS. We are happy to observe that many of the Paintings exhibited in the British Gallery, are now marked as sold; and we should hope that this species of encouragement is the only thing wanting to place the efforts of the British pencil on a level with the most finished works of Claude or Salvator. For the perfection to which the Arts have arisen on the Coutinent, the World is in debted to the munificence of a few Princes, or to the enthusiasm of religion prompting. the Painter to decorate the shrine of his patron saint ; hut if perfection arose front those sources, what may we mot expect from the fostering care tint British Public.-- To return to our Examination — No. 359.—The Battle of Trafalgar, as seen from the starboard mizen shrouds of the ridurs. .1. M. W. 'Fr it s ra. One great, and almost universal error, to which our mariws Painters are subject, is that of comprisins ton much on their Cats vas; this gives a crowding audconfused •appearance to their works which is very dissimilar to reality. If ‘lr. 'Punter svould stood on the poop of the V ictory,with a pieta re frame, the size of his own placed before him, at a proper distance, he would then see, that so many objects could not he crowded together under so small an ansle as it would subtend ; unless, indeed, the ohjects were removed to a much greater distsnee, w hen, of course, their relative size would he consideratil N• diminished below that in which he has here delineated them. Ue has also drown many. of the objects with much greater rxartnrss than reality will war 'rant. In the groupe in particular, which surrounds Lord Nelson, on the fore part of the quarter deck, 'tis impossible that their features could appear so well delineated to a person standing on the poop. In this painting; also, the drips are much under masted; indeed they look like three deckers under jury toasts. This disproportion is very glaring, and is rendered more so from want of attention to Heber circumstances. The yards of the Victory. making allowance for the fore-shorten ing, are not sufficiently square ; the tops arc too small, in pro portion to the size of the ship, and to Ilse size of the people, who are represented in them, whilst from the length of the laniards and the consequent distance of the dead eyes, the top mast rigging seems as if it had never been set up. There are several other errors, which we have not ma n tis to notice. yet, in other respects, rte must allow it the merit oflts.ing well executed, though its outline is faulty ; the figures are Spiritedly and to those w Ito are not disposed to criticise its linear naurary, it must afford much interest and grstification. In the center of the room, and opposite to Mr. Turner's painting, it No. 486.—A Model, by Mr. WTATT, of a iironument to the Memory at* the immurtol Admen. This Monument stands in the centre of a circular range of Steps, and consists of an elegantly ornamented base, on which is a figure of Nelson, supporting a dap, and receivins a wreath front Fame. Beneath him is Death, stasting from abroud, with one hand fixed upon his gallant heart ; and behind the base, or pe-. destal, is Britannia weeping, and resting . on her shield, which is decorated with the insignia of his different orders. The figures in chains at the foot of The pedestal fill up the space, w ith much taste; indeed, all the figures, considered stparately, have much ease, and are grouped in a masterly manner. This Monument is designed for a central situation in some public building, and it( therefore finished entour. No. 427.—Landscape, a Composition: and A r st. M.—Lands., cape near A rchhovel, i 3. Bs aiunt. These two Landscapes, from their size and situation, seem de signed for companions, and if the painter intended to ssew the effect of the contrast, he certainly has succeeded. The first is a ".•