National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-03-11
MEy OF ONE IDEA.


pable of impressing 1t upon the world at large
is to be man of genius. To possess two or
more ideas with the same completeness is to be
one of those rare intellectual giants who scarce
ly appear more than once in a century. We
might, perhaps, 60 further, and classify the
men of ideas into those who have q right and
those who have wrong idea. But It may be
assumed that even a wrong idea is better than
absence of ideas. Stupidity is, as we know,
the one thing against which even the gods
fight in vain; because It affords no leverage by
which to act upon it in any way. If q man has
some intellectual sensiblity, he is at least open
to reason; and the chances are that his theo-
ries, however erroneous they may be, take in
some side of the truth which Is not perceptible
to his neighbors. How rare it is to find a man
to whom We can confidently attribute the pos
sessions of more than a single idea may be
proved by q survey of some of the different
branches of intellectual activity. Nobody, as
his disciples tell us, has produced q greater
effect upon legislation since the beginning of
the century than Jeremy Bentham. And Ben
than, as even his disciples admit, had not room
in his head for more than q single idea. Those
heavy volumes, from which all ordinary read
ers shrink In disgust, are but incessant appli-
cations and reapplications of the great doctrine
that the criterion of morality is the production
of the greatest happiness ofthe greatest num-
Der.
The theory occurred to him early in life, and
stuck to him to the end of his days. 1t never
struck him that 1t was not absolutely true, or
that it did not afford sufficient answer to every
conceivable problem in ethical or political spec
ulation. 1t may be disputed whether an opin-
ion capable of being compressed into SO narrow
. formula had any proper claims to be called
an idea, and in that case Bentham would have
to be placed among the inferior class of people
who cannot even boast of a single idea. We do
not hold that this would be just, but, If SO, it
would strengthen the argument. If the mere
possession Of one fraction of an idea gives q man
so undeniable an influence over the minds of
his contemporaries, how great must be the force
Of a mind comprehensive enough to take in q
complete idea and regard It from all its sides !
Innumerable illustrations might be adduced
from politics. The single idea of the indefeas-
ible rights of man upset the world and made
two or three distinct regulations. Even the
dogma of free-trade, which at most involves a
negative idea, AND Way be held along with the
most imperfect social theory, has provided more
than one man of undeniable ability, If not of
true genius with sufficient materials for talking
and preaching throughout the whole course Of
his life. al @G -; 5l. =. 20 s--
1t may be disputed with more plausibility
whether the same theory admits of an applica-
ton to the great imaginative writers as wen Is
to the mere reasopers. 1t certainly sounds Inn
proper to limit the number of ideas which
might be contained In the brain ola Shakespeare
or Goethe. And yet, In q. certain sense, it
would seem that, If we set aside the very great
est names, the opinion b plausible even in this
case The most original and vigorous preacher
Of our time, who applies the practical method
to political and moral questions, has certainly
made such use Of two or three thoughts that
his cardinal doctrines might be summed up In
a page. Take away from his writings the doc
trine as to the superiority Of silence to speech,
as to the vitaffmportance OF hero-worship, and
two or three more such fundamental opinions,
and the bulk of his volumes would sink into
very limited space. jean Paul Richter says
that many of his volumes expanded out Of the
single phrases in Shakespeare about our little
lives being rounded with a sleep. Certainly
the same may be said of our own writer, who
owes something of his method, and perhaps of
his manner, to the teaching OF jean Paul. We
meet with that single thought, expressed with
infinite vivacity and variety, it is true, but still
with substantially the same meaning, in fnnu-
merable pages Of his writings. The example
minded owes, after all !, . very large prepor
ton of his influence to his constant embOli-
ment of the same thought. Cut out from
Shakespeare the character Of Hamlet, and all
the subsidiary characters into which the Ham
Let element enters as . main constituent, and,
though Shakespeare would still be very great
poet, he would have made a long descent to-
ward the level on which Jonson and Fletcher
and number of scarcely inferior rivals may
be placed. reE. as-w .
But the essence of Hamlet Is given in half q
dozen of the great speeches which we all know,
or ought to know, by heart; and, If We dared
to venture the experiment, and had the neces-
sary capacity, We might possibly sum up the
secret of the charm in one or two sentences.
We will not attempt task 30 provocative Of
hostile criticism; and, Indeed, It might take q
Shakespeare to do It satisfactorily. But IL the
process be possibly applicable to the greatest
name in our literature, It Is certainly applicable
to many of the minor ones. A couplet or two
gives the essence Of Pope; afew Lines from one
Of his odes would be enough to express Words
worth. and stanza or 90 from Dan Juan would
give all Byron's message TO the world. 1t 70 an
accepted rule in oratory that you should say
the same thing over in . great number Of forms
II you would impress it upon any common
audience; and the rule might be extended
much further. Every great work of art has
some dominant idea few writer's have left
more than one great work and when they
have, the dominant idea has generally been the
same in all. though different aspects of the
central truth may have been exhibited.-The
Saturday Revier.