The Jeffersonian. [volume] (Stroudsburg, Pa.) 1853-1911, 1859-02-24
FOR THE JEFFERSoNIAN.
Criticisms Criticised.

0ee""SS Puohsneu III your paper, oVei
the signature of Reporter" The week
following, | saw very impertinent, and
to the Society, grossly insulting article,
over the very expressive signature OF
"More Light" This, the Reporter" felt
himself called upon to answer, which, he
perhaps, should not have done, but which
he did in a justly severe manner. "More
Light" should have been treated as his
conduct merited, with silent contempt.
For such intrusive spobs-(an other new
word perhaps, but snob means briefly, a
vain pretender)-have no right to insult
the public with their foul and slanderous
conceptions. But, "More Light" rejoined,
and "Rcporter" replied, stating the origin
of the controversy, and very properly re.
fused to have any thing further to do
with a person SO abusive, and SO much
pulled up with his own conceit, (as all
snobs are that he cannot stoop sufficient
ly low to see himself as he really is. In the
same paper with Reporters last arti-
Gle sppeared an Essay, of no small merit,
which it seems was written by the afore-
said "Reporter'-Mr. Holmes, of your A
cademy. This snobbish critic, (pardou
me, sir, for I cannot 6ud more appro.
pirate epitbet-) pounced on the Essayist,
like ravepous animal on its prey, fully
determined to slaughter him without ben
eft of clergy. This is truly an unchris
tian act, and one of which DO christian
ought to be guilty.
When criticisms emanate from persons
sufficiently honest and able to properly
conduct them, they very often prove high
y instructive as well as amusing. But
when in tho hands Of person devoid of
both honesty and ability, then they ID ost
generally become perfect nuisapces, as the
criticism in your last weeks paper fully
demonstrates.
This critic inagines that he has dicov-
cred many incongruities in sense, and al
so many gramn n atical errors.
10 regard to the grammatical errors,
we are cbaritably informed, l suppose,
"that singular nouns connected BY dis.
juuctiVe conjunctiOns must always have
pronouns and verbs agreeing with them
of the singular number" This, sir, is
nearly always true, but are there not ex-
ceptious! Now, Homer, Virgil or VIII.
Shakespeare" are not spoken of singly,
but are spoken of collectively, 1t is e.
quail to saying Homer, Virgil and Shaks,
peare; or, even Shakespeare, speaking Of
the latter iD a parenthetical sense. But.
according to this critic, the prououn "he, =
should have been used instead OF the pro
noun "tbey." If the Essayist had done
this, then the pronoun "be'' would only
refer to Shakespeare, and not to the two
former or whole three, as was Intended.
He also finds fault with the manLer in
which the relative ahone is used, and
says that "a boy who has studded gram
ar four weeks ought to know that acjtons
is only used in speaking of persons and
things perSOnated," and that therefore, it
was wrong to persoBify necessity as it
is, in the Essay.
Now, here is grand display of those
classics with which this critics productions
abound. l mean the classics of nonsense,
and not those to which be SO pcdanti.
cally alludes. He uses the word "per.
senate" for personify. To explain, SO
that our critic may comprehend u.s.
Personste means to counterfeit; to rep
resent one man for an other; for example:
ifin the play of Macbeth person takes
the character of Mackbeth, he in doing
so counterfeits or personates him. While
personify is entirely different, and means,
to change from thing to person; as, to
give, in imagination, an animal the char
acter and attributes of man.
Now, this is too gross an error for a
person who makes any pretentions 10 q
kuowledge of literature to be guilty Of !;
and wonder if the boy alluded to above,
with his four weeks study of grammar,
could not have Informed him this much.
But this critic must not become entirely
discouraged, for bis manifest youtbfulness
may to great extent account for bis evil
dent verdsncy: age may assist him; for
it often brings with it knowledge and
judgment; and it may therefore, teach
this youthful critic, that 10 carving litera.
ture, it is much better to take the knife
| BY the handle than the blade. (yet his