their stations. And so, were higher attainments to "Goldsmith (he said,) referred every thing to vanity; his virtues, and his vices too were from that motive. He was not a social man. He never exchanged mind with you." We spent the evening at Mr. Hoole's. Mr. Mickle, the excellent translator of "The Lusiad," was there. I have preserved little of the conversation of this evening. Dr. Johnson said, "Thomson had a true poetical genius, the power of viewing every thing in a poetical light. His fault is such a cloud of words sometimes, that the sense can hardly peep through. Shiels, who compiled Cibber's Lives of the poets,' was one day sitting with me. I took down Thomson, and read aloud a large portion of him, and then asked, -Is not this fine? Shiels having expressed the highest admiration. Well, Sir, (said I,) I have omitted every other line." 66 9 I related a dispute between Goldsmith and Mr. Robert Dodsley, one day when they and I were dining at Tom Davies's, in 1762. Goldsmith asserted, that there was no poetry produced in this age. Dodsley appealed to his own Collection, and maintained, that though you could not find a palace like Dryden's " Ode on St. Cecilia's Day," you had villages composed of very pretty houses; and he mentioned particularly "The Spleen." JOHNSON." I think Dodsley gave up the question. He and Goldsmith said the same thing; only he said it in a softer manner than Goldsmith did; for he acknowledged there was no poetry, nothing that towered above the common mark. You may find wit and humour in verse, and yet no poetry. 9. See, ante, Note, p. 27, &c. 'Hubibras' has a profusion of these; yet it is not to be reckoned a poem. The Spleen,' in Dodsley's collection, on which you say he chiefly rested, is not poetry." BOSWELL." Does not Gray's poetry, Sir, tower above the common mark?" JOHNSON. JOHNSON." Yes, difference between Sir; but we must attend to the what men in general cannot do if they would, and what every man may do if he would. Sixteen-string Jack1 towered above the common mark." BOSWELL. "Then, Sir, what is poetry?" JOHNSON. " Why, Sir, it is much easier to say what it is not. We all know what light is; but it is not easy to tell what it is." On Friday, April 12, I dined with him at our friend Tom Davies's, where we met Mr. Cradock, of Leicestershire, authour of “ Zobeide," a tragedy; a very pleasing gentleman, to whom my friend Dr. Farmer's very excellent Essay on the Learning of Shakspeare is addressed; and Dr. Harwood, who has written and published various works; particularly a fantastical translation of the New Testament, in modern phrase, and with a Socinian twist. 66 I introduced Aristotle's doctrine in his " Art of Poetry," of "xatapois τwy пadnμaτwv, the purging of the passions," as the purpose of tragedy.2 "But how are the passions to be purged by terrour and pity?" (said I, with an assumed air of ignorance, to incite him to 1 A noted highwayman, who, after having been several times. tried and acquitted, was at last hanged. He was remarkable for foppery in his dress, and particularly for wearing a bunch of sixteen strings at the knees of his breeches. 2 See an ingenious Essay on this subject by the late Dr. Moor, Greek professor at Glasgow. [See also a learned note on this passage of Aristotle, by Mr. Twining, in his admirable translation of the Poeticks, in which the various explanations of other criticks are considered, and in which Dr. Moor's Essay is particularly discussed. J. BoswELL.] talk, for which it was often necessary to employ some address.) JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, you are to consider what is the meaning of purging in the original sense. It is to expel impurities from the human body. The mind is subject to the same imperfection. The passions are the great movers of human actions; but they are mixed with such impurities, that it is necessary they should be purged or refined by means of terrour and pity. For instance, ambition is a noble passion; but by seeing upon the stage, that a man who is so excessively ambitious as to raise himself by injustice, is punished, we are terrified at the fatal consequences of such a passion. In the same manner a certain degree of resentment is necessary; but if we see that a man carries it too far, we pity the object of it, and are taught to moderate that passion." My record upon this occasion does great injustice to Johnson's expression, which was so forcible and brilliant, that Mr. Cradock whispered me, "O that his words were I observed the great defect of the tragedy of "Othello" was, that it had not a moral; for that no man could resist the circumstances of suspicion which were artfully suggested to Othello's mind. JOHNSON. "In the first place, Sir, we learn from Othello this very useful moral, not to make an unequal match; in the second place, we learn not to yield too readily to suspicion. The handkerchief is merely a trick, though a very pretty trick; but there are no other circumstances of reasonable suspicion, except what is related by Iago of Cassio's warm expressions concerning Desdemona in his sleep; and that depended entirely upon the assertion of one man. No, Sir, I think Othello has more moral than almost any play." Talking of a penurious gentleman of our acquaint 66 ance, Johnson said, Sir, he is narrow, not so much from avarice, as from impotence to spend his money. He cannot find in his heart to pour out a bottle of wine; but he would not much care if it should sour." He said, he wished to see "John Dennis's Critical Works" collected. Davies said, they would not sell. Dr. Johnson seemed to think otherwise, Davies said of a well known dramatick authour, that "he lived upon potted stories, and that he made his way as Hannibal did, by vinegar; having begun by attacking people, particularly the players." He reminded Dr. Johnson of Mr. Murphy's having paid him the highest compliment that ever was paid to a layman, by asking his pardon for repeating some oaths in the course of telling a story. Johnson and I supped this evening at the Crown and Anchor tavern, in company with Sir Joshua Reynolds, Mr. Langton, Mr. Nairne, now one of the Scotch Judges, with the title of Lord Dunsinan, and my very worthy friend, Sir William Forbes, of Pitsligo. We discussed the question, whether drinking improved conversation and benevolence. Sir Joshua maintained, it did. JOHNSON. "No, Sir: before dinner men meet with great inequality of understanding; and those who are conscious of their inferiority, have the modesty not to talk. When they have drunk wine, every man feels himself happy, and loses that modesty, and grows impudent and vociferous: but he is not improved: he is only not sensible of his defects." Sir Joshua said the Doctor was talking of the effects of excess in wine; but that a moderate glass enlivened the mind, by giving a proper circulation to the blood. " I am, (said he,) in very good spirits, when I get up in the morning. By dinner time I am exhausted; wine puts me in the same state as when I got up and I am sure that moderate drinking makes people talk better." JOHNSON." No, Sir; wine gives not light, gay, ideal, hilarity; but tumultuous, noisy, clamorous merriment. I have heard none of those drunken,-nay, drunken is a coarse word,-none of those vinous flights." SIR JOSHUA." Because you have sat by, quite sober, and felt an envy of the happiness of those who were drinking." JOHNSON." Perhaps, contempt.-And, Sir, it is not necessary to be drunk one's self, to relish the wit of drunkenness. Do we not judge of the drunken wit of the dialogue between Iago and Cassio, the most excellent in its kind, when we are quite sober? Wit is wit, by whatever means it is produced; and, if good, will appear so at all times. I admit that the spirits are raised by drinking, as by the common participation of any pleasure: cock-fighting, or bear-baiting will raise the spirits of a company, as drinking does, though surely they will not improve conversation. I also admit, that there are some sluggish men who are improved by drinking; as there are fruits which are not good till they are rotten. There are such men, but they are medlars. I indeed allow that there have been a very few men of talents who were improved by drinking: but I maintain that I am right as to the effects of drinking in general: and let it be considered, that there is no position, however false in its universality, which is not true of some particular man. Sir William Forbes said, Might not a man warmed with wine be like a bottle of beer, which is made brisker by being set before the fire!"" Nay, (said Johnson, laughing,) I cannot answer that: that is too much for me." 66 I observed, that wine did some people harm, by inflaming, confusing, and irritating their minds; but that the experience of mankind had declared in favour |