The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-11-30

construed much more widely. But. taking
things on the whole. the ancients' have
anticipated almost everything, and In
everything that they anticipated have
done 30 well that the best chance of success
is simply to initiate them. The detailed
preccpts Of Horace are never to lie ne
elected; II supplemented. they must he
supple me nted in the same sense"
This. then. ia fundamental distinction
between the seventeenth century and the
nineteenth. 70 far As criticism Is concerned
Take n dozen critics of any eminence al
different times and OF different countries
| in the re venteenth century in Europe. and
ask them to enunciate some gene raj laws
and principles Of literary criticism. The
results. IL not slavishly identical. would he
practically the same; they would agree
1 substantially with the creed which we have
just quoted DO the same thing at any time
| for the last hundred--certainly for the last
seventy o. eighty--yeaIs. and the result
would le a Babel II any two OF the utter
ances did not bctray a direct contradiction.
| II would probably he because the speakers
tegan al entirely different facets of the
subject. The assertion that the creed just
| quoted was crystalhzed and made authori
ta,ive in the seventeenth century may seem
! unorthodox 20 those who put faith in the
notion that there was a Romantic revolt"
in the lightning Of the seventeenth century.
that there was even kind Of Eruption. or
troublesome OF medi@val barbarian and
that the pronounced and hardened class
I cism Of the later half Of the century was
fresh reaction. To Prof. Saintsburys
mind the texts. and the facts. and the dates
, do not justify this view Of history. The
| crystallizing OF the classical creed goes on
regardless Of Euphuism. earlier and later,
| in England; of Marinism in Italy; OF cut
! turanism and Conceptisn in Spain; of the
irregular outbur-ts Of similar tastes in
| France which mari, the reign of Louis
| XIII A we have seen. Ogier in the last
named country. AZ the very moment of
striking blow for Romantic drama. admits
| that the critics are against him. end we
have also seen how they we're In England,
Sidney. mt the beginning Of the great Eliza
! tethan period, holds ont hands TO Jonson
at the end The very Spanish Romantics.
! when they come to consider the matter
critically. make an unbhishing transac ton
| between console ntious theory and popular
1 practice: and such an Italian iconoclast
NJ Beni IL classical. In the very act and
process Of belittling the classics Once
more: 'In the Middle Ages. "a We have saen,
| there was no code Of criticism at all; in the
siStee nth century, only growing approach
10 one. though the approach had become
very near al the last. Sore outbreaks
' of he,erodoSy last stand of Romance
! for the 'ime-had. as usually happens,
drawn the orthodox together. had made
them sign definite, or almost definite,
instrument or confession. just OF unjust,
adequate or inadequate. even consistent
or inconsistent. =, IL may he. from the view
point OF very sear,hing and allinspec' ing
logic. the o-ciassicisin of the late saven
! teenih century was n thing about which
there could no mistake. II knew its own
mind atou' eveiNtl ing which II cho-r 10
consi,'ef. and vslirrtlv shut its eyes tn
! every ding which IL 'ho~, 30 ignore. For
tirrc-a shot t!rc only. of course. for the
triumph Of II religion l. always the signal
for the appearance Of u hcresy- The ma jcr-
ity of T. orln lad not wuch more doubt
! ort what Wa. the IroI~r thing to believe
| in and adni'e in lucrative than they had
| nj out the multiplication talle
| The cxhihito OF tbs defects of the Nco-
| lassic creed of criticism occupies the
| greater part of the present volume. Had
| the crsd any sp ,citl merits OF it, own?
| YA., answers our author. they are partly
! o. "A negative kind hu' they certainly exist
! Prof S,iutsbury il hv no means certain
that ths provisional orthodoxy formulated
in the creed which We have quoted was not
necessary condition Of the growth of the
new study OF Esthetic, which, though il has
done criticism harm a. we'll as good has
certainly done IL good as well "a harm.
Neither does he deem il possible TO deny
that there was something 10 admire in the
creed itself 1T was weakest was. in
fact. exceedingly weak on the poetical
side; but the world happened to have ar-
cumulated a remarkably good stock Of
poetry in the last two cent uries or 20, ard
| a fallow, or a cessation of manufacture, was
not undesirable. Prose, on the other hand,
had never been got into proper order in the
vernacuars; and II was urgently desirable
that 1t should be = o got The very preCepts
| OF the classical creed which we're most mis-
chicvous in poetry were sovereign for prose.
Here, also they might hinder the develop
ment OF eccentric excellence: but it was not
eccentric excellence that was wanted. I'm
Just things have been said about the poetry
Of the Aug,lstan ages. just things may he
said against the criticism which mainly
controlled that poetry. But it is hardly ex-
cessive 10 say that every precept not
purely metrical-contained In the Arts Of
Boileau and Of Pope is just and true for
prose You may fly in the face of almost
| every one Of these precepts and be the
better poet for IL, hy in the face of almost
any one OF them in prose and you must
have extraordinary genius if you do not
rue it Even as to poetry itself, Prof.
| Saintsbury thinks that some defence of the
neo classic creed may be- made The
| poetry of the later seventeenth and OF the
! eighteenth centuries needed these rules.
THE later and weaker metaphysicals in
England and fantasts in France, the Marin
lists and Gongorsts in Spain and Italy had
shown what happens when Furor Iperel
| Poeticus ceases TO ply the oars. and Good
Sense has not come to take the helm. It is
pretty certain that If this criticism had not
ruled We should not have had good or
great Romantic Poetry. we should have at
best had Ito take England) few more
Dyers and Lady Winchelseas. But if it
had not ruled we should have had less
perfect Pope and less presentable minori-
ties of this kind. and have been by no means
consoled by supply OF eighteenth century
| Clevelands In fine, our author is con-
WINGED that given period has the criticism
that 1t needs, the criticism that will enable
| it to give us it's own good things at their