New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-09-19
BITS or CRITICISM.
rom Tte Richmond VIM DEM, Sept. -.

SHELLEY's LACK OF SAGACTTY.-The gift Of
presenting Faithfully those ge eIazatons ngon p0gtry
beautifully Aristot edownwaTds cyinctd,
no doubt IN Sneeys Essays upon Poetry aud IN many
scattered remarks 10 hs prose wtngs and letters but
TINS not criticism in the sense TINT WOrdswOrths and
Colerdgcs generaizatons criticism or IN the sense
that some % The searchiug and astonishing sayings
of Keats critiesm.->ueh Tor instance az ms dell
ming poetry To De Might "half -lumbering OF It's
right arm The moment Shelley leaves generalItIes
and comes 10 speak OF ndIydnai e1snpes Oh literary
causes people view his theological and social disqu
stions with perplexity aud astonishment-lThe
AtheD8um.
SHELLEY's CRITICIsMs.-In critclsing paint
Ing. Saeley h1rAY GU level wtth me best
taste his day IN cricsing sculpture the most
poeca OF the plastic arts, he certainly rose above u
The learning aud acumen OF soue OF these notes e4
pressed IN language finer tnan Leasing or WlncAenann
recoilect that Illuminating eve OF poet not
anay ic eye Of an anliquafy, WIN when shelley
Angelus ia ncOmparaby nne mat OF the Nrnus Ana.
dyOmeme az vgor and sPlendor tna' r pSt we ne-'
RCsKIx on BYRoN.-He was the first great
Engi.Du,sn who elt the cruet " OF war. an0 III lis
cruelty the shame. Its guilt had been known 10 George
Fox-its fcs shown practically ~ fSnh bu' ae COM
been only III keepias rs stock OF baraS1srS Kn
hanged If possible una; . J tsnSnt the nty and
nersdorf Eyiau, ,'nr "a'e''o'' ""u 's ''' P'' ""'
"rbe drying up a single tear has more
or honest fame than shedding soas OF GORE
Cue, nsciac verse would indeed have been accepta
80 ~ The EoInburgh volunteers Portobello sands.
RVr0u can
10 dVhf look at tine Introduction 10 the Isles Of
namely the S5th aud s6h stsnzas OF tire 81 canto
-, fnn Imam will hnd-wbat Will you not md, II
only YOU understand them He In the first line, re
memIer means tie typical modern poet--iIhe Nine
teentb Century.
RyRoS's ..SNOBBIsHNEss.'-If we consider
p,ae.snr Nichols verdict Byrons personality too
ia,ieut "a WHOLE IL IS not because we MINK worse
nm he does of his herOs moral deiinquences, but
tai we think those denquencles we're aggravated by
a ouaIty In which Professor Nlchoi seems 70 see
some hing This Is wnat We can only can
Ynngh we do II with reluctance, the snObDishness OF the
noets cbarscter His Biography treats sucs things as
H. tneffabe request that Lord DeawaT should De
snared Tagging he Il brother peer; MS wei
come OF the brother OF letters VINO stopped 10 as
sum the "DoDe author attitude 10 him, and his WRATH
a. those who refused assume this attitude MS child
ian osenIaon In dress IN boasting OF hs ancestry III
claiming precedence OF the English Ambassador and All
the resi- 81 NJ trcify, not as definite
and very DIV disease One really IL sometimes tempted
10 think that there must have been q par sinister
acme here else the tree than ia The place Where IL
T,susiy anpear. ana Byron not Byron aftef
All Tor DntnnR can be different than his family
pride and hat OF typical figures as tile famous
kProud Duke" OF Somerset Ii was uneasy t0uchy.
most in little things mud altogether rather tue
pride of DE MogyDs Flz Shocks than the pride OF
l,rsrer of one or the best names III England We
hardly know a disquietIne case for the impli nt
halle v.rs maxim Bon so"g ae pewt msns~-tIhe
Saturday Review