« 이전계속 »
readers to Bishop Hurd's masterly curs, is the following. " The warmest works. The absurdity of so unfounded admirers of Wordsworth (except such and novel a charge against that pre- a violent bigot as G. M. Bridge-street, eminently original writer, Lord By- Derby) condemn his infantile lisping." ron, and the ridiculous attempt to Yet G. M. unblushingly insinuates degrade into a mere plagiarist, a that I had “termed him a bigot" for poet, whose fame has spread, and his “ adherence to the cause of truth whose works are admired, throughout and virtue,” instead of the fact, that Europe, America, and the civilized he was so named for his admiration of parts of Asia, might tempt me to ask the Idiot Boy, Peter Bell, Alice Fell, your readers, in the words of Horace, the Waggoner, &c. In limine, I may Risum teneatis, amici?
turn G. M.'s own words against himNow then for the writers who replied self, and observe, that "it augurs to my last letter. Of these I would well for” Aristarchus “ to find his rewillingly reserve G. M.'s production viler driven to such unworthy expeditill the conclusion, as a bonne bouche; ents.” Another charge against me is, but Mark Etheridge is such a very that I “have called up the dead lanlong time suffering the throes of par- guages to reinforce my positions." turition, that I cannot wait for him; But as Johnson says, that “classical as I like to do every thing with dis- quotation is the parole of literary men patch. To use the words of a “fun- all over the world," I am only sorry damental” statesman, I feel an “igno- that I cannot return G. M. the complirant impatience” of what this moun- MENT No reader of his letters will tain will bring forth: at present there ever accuse him of erudition; and has only appeared a mouse. As G.M. though he seems raving in defence of then cannot be reserved, I will take “ the simple Wordsworth,” he may him first, as captain of the squad, console bimself with the reflection, and greet him with a sublime verse from that no one will ever accost him as his favourite Wordsworth.
Festus addressed Paul, “ Much learn. "Oh what's the matter, what's the inatter,
ing hath made thee mad.” Were G. What is't that ails young Harry Gill,
M. acquainted with the beauty and the That evermore his teeth they cbatter,
brilliancy, the fire and the sublimity, Chatter, CHATTER, CHATTER, still? the tenderness and the pathos, of
some writers in “tbe dead languages,” I am happy to find that the castiga- he might then perhaps be able to aption I gave G. M. has produced some preciate the excellencies of Byron. good effect.
“ The galled jade win- When such “ A SCIOLIST" (as ScrutaThe Derby writer evidently tor terms G. M.) rails against classinow puts forth his ébauches with timi- cal literature, it reminds one of Quincdity, though, as might be expected, tilian's remark "damnant quod non “ here and there the cloven foot ap- intelligunt.” The admirers of Shakpears,” since
speare will be reminded of Jack Cade's -hæret lateri lethalis arundo. condemnation of the Clerk of Chat
ham. As G. M. is so extremely partial to Peter Bell, he cannot be displeased Smith. He can write, and read, and cast at my adopting Peter Bell's resolu- accounts. tion.
Coule. Oh monstrous !
Smith. We took him setting of boys' co“ Tis come then to a pretty pass,
pies. Says Peter to the groaning ass,
Cade. Here's a villain ! But I will bang your bones.'
Smith. He has a book in his pocket with
red letters in it. G. M. talks about “a firm adhe- Cade. Nay, then he is a conjuror. rence to the cause of truth and virtue, Dick. Nay, he can make obligations and subjecting him to be termed a bigot.” write court band. Strongly attached as I am, Mr. Edi
Cade. I am sorry for't: the man is a proper tor, to the cause of truth and vir- guilty, he shall not die. Come hither, sirrah.
on mine honour; unless I find him tue," G. M.'s insinuation that he was I must examine thee. What is thy name? “ termed a bigot," for such a "cause,” Clerk, Emmanuel excited
my utmost astonishment. Dick. They use to write it on the top of Upon referring to my letter, the mys
letters. "Twill go hard with you.
Cade. Let me alone. Dost thou use to tery was explained. The only sen
write thy name? or hast thou a mark to thytence in which the word “bigot” oc- self, like an honest plain dealing man? No. 42.-Vol. IV.
Clark. Sir, I thank God I have been so another's poem as his own (and which well brought up that I can write my name. circumstance might have been over
Au. He hath confessed: away with bim; looked, but for his soi-disant friends' he's a villain and a traitor.
Cade. Away with him, I say; hang bim blustering) adds to his degradation, with his pen and inkhorn about bis neck. and ingulphs him in Milton's dread
abyss, While G. M, admits the correctness of the several extracts I cited a lower deep still threat’ning to devour" him
" in the lowest deep, from Mr. Hazlitt, in which “the Opens wide, which makes the hell he suffer'd simple Wordsworth" is condemned, Seem a heaven.” he thinks it was intimated that the line he quoted was “a fabrication of found that in a subsequent edition to
Soon after writing my last letter, I his own. So far from this being the the one I used, w. had confessed case, Sir, I tacitly admitted its cor
that the “ rectness; but I did say that “surely
Ancyent Marinere" was G. M. cannot have read Mr. Hazlitt's not his own composition, and I there
fore anticipated G. Mi's carmen triumworks, because (to turn G. M.'s own words against himself again) “no dilemma occurs.
phale. But Sir, an insuperable
G. M. claims tho writer would be fairly represented by
“Idiot Boy" for Wordsworth: Mark a couple of lines designedly selected.” But I see that G. M. (inding Mr. Etheridge (col. 1122) asserts it to be Hazlitt condemns “the simple Words: written by Mr. Coleridge. worth,”) directs his censures against Strange that there should such differenco be that gentleman now. Your impartial | 'Twixt tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee." readers will know how to appreciate
“Who shall decide when doctors” such a literary weathercock. The extracts from Wordsworth, in my last
and especially when such“ doctors letter, were transcribed from the edi- disagree?" Has Wordsworth attempttion of his Lyric Ballads, printed by ed to palm off Mr. Coleridge's poem J. and A. Arch, London, 1798, and also as his own? in that copy, not a single intimation is
“ I'm out od ocean's deep, given, that Wordsworth is not the Nor see the shore.” author of the “Ancyent Marinere;' If G. M. “regards as incurable" but the following sentence from the every one who applies the epithet advertisement prefixed, leaves no of simple, to doubt in the minds of its readers, that Wordsworth was the author of that As soft as ev’ning in bis fav’rite May,
“ The simple Wordsworth, framer of a lay poem. “The rhyme of the Ancyent Who both by precept and example shows Marinere was professedly written in That prose is verse, and verse is merely imitation of the style, as well as of prose,” the spirit, of the elder poets ; but with be will find an host of “incurables," a few exceptions, the author believes and had need found an hospital for that the language adopted in it has them. It will be a great curiositybeen equally intelligible for the three
an eighth wonder of the world for it last centuries." I put it now to the will unquestionably be the largest good sense of your readers, whether, ever created, and will include pot after perusing that sentence, they only every living writer of repute,
but would not have deemed “the author'
also all who, as Pbilo says, are not to be the same "author" as wrote the
below their teens.” In return for volume. “Were" G. M. the stu- G. M.'s charity, I cannot do less than dent, he would lead the public to sup- recommend his being appointed the pose, he must have known” of this Cerberus. If he decline building an edition. “ Indeed I cannot but sur
Hospital des Incurables,” I will nemise that my opponent is very scantily vertheless promise him that I will prepared for the critical exploit which
never read the “ Idiot Boy,” without he has undertaken.” I congratulate, thinking of G. M. Bridge-street, Derhowever, bis having at last discovered that his “ little learning is a dangerous beauty in Lord Byron's verse,
by.-G. M. says that I thing." Wordsworth may well exclaim with some of old, "Save me from The mind-the music breathing from her face, my friends,” for the fact of bis having while I have overlooked the fine lines attempted to palm upon the world of Wordsworth,
“ And she shall lean her ear
more formidable opponent, than in In many a secret place,
his letters he “would have us believe." Where riv'lets dance their wayward round,
Such a compliment made in so uninAnd beauty born of murmuring sound Shall pass into her face.”
tentional a manner, (thereby demon
strating it was sincerity, and not flatI have indulged in this latitude of tery, that prompted it,) leads me to quotation, Sir, because I wish to do forego the further exposure of such a all possible justice to this most ex- writer as G. M. Indeed it is unnecestraordinary writer. Now “the beau- sary, for G. M. has PROVED HIMSELP ty” I saw, was in the “fine lines” of to be " utterly blinded by prejudice, Lord Byron's description of Zuleika, and unfit for engaging in the analysis and not in an isolated line. G. M.'s of poetic merit.' I leave him, there.
quotations” (his own words turned fore, with “ Alice Fell's"-" husb-aagainst himself once more) are pecu- by, baby, by.” liarly unfortunate for his purpose, and Of the tragedy-bounce, by a “Norwhere they have any weight, they wich SUBSCRIBER,” common charity
to-not merely seem, but really induces me to take no notice. do-bear upon the opposite side of the question,” since it is a fact, as
January 2, 1822. every reader of Byron well knows, Etheridge, either in the supplement or
Nothing having appeared from Mark that for the very line G. M. has se- in the January number, I shall no lected, Lord Byron was obliged to longer delay noticing his "mouse." write a vindicatory note. But let us look at these fine lines” of Words- Mark is certainly a man of “intelliworth. Not many ladies will “lean gence:” he knows all the “news”.
about “ Benbow !" Whether he bo their ears in a secret place where rivu- that printer's bellman I cannot say ; lets dance:" the fair sex are generally if he be too much afraid of the water !-Here is also a new parentage for “beauty,” “Oh how much better ‘now would be his she is declared to be “ born of a bap' sound,” and that sound too must be of If to bis bells he would bat add a cap." a peculiar sort, it must be “a mur- Mark denies Lord Byron's benefimuring sound !!!”-As to “Peter Bell,"cence! Perhaps knowing himself to G. M. well knows (if he ever read that resemble Achan, he therefore “ poem) that the “extract he has given pects” philanthropy in others; but the is not a specimen: perhaps, however, FACTS I adduced are not to be overhe cited it as a specimen” of the turned by a “denial.” Various relitruth of the reviewer's character of gious publications have attested the that doggrel, as “daudling impotent noble poet's extensive charity. The drivel;” for “ EXCEPTIO probat regu- Rev. Mr. Maturin speaks in every lam.” I was about to expose some society in terms of enthusiastic grati. other“ errors of my opponentevincing tude for his Lordship’s beneficence. his critical sagacity,” when my atten- Mr. Wiffin, a member of the Society tion was arrested by his intimation, of Friends, and the excellent author that Aristarchus was the reviewer of of Aonian Hours, Julia Alpinala, the Peter Bell, part of whose critique Captive of Stamboul, and other admi. appeared in col. 1018. That extract, rable poems, justly appreciates Lord Sir, was copied from the “Monthly Byron’s genius, and beautifully comReview” of August, 1819; but that memorates his Lordship’s Aristarchus, even in the estimation of
“ BENEVOLENCE, an adversary, should write well enough
Which speaks a better and a brighter doom for a Monthly Reviewer, may well Than envy grants.” “excite” bis gratification “not a lit
WIFFIN'S AONIAN HOURS; tle.” Such a deference to my compo- a work which needs only to be read'in sition, I did not expect, and “though” order to be admired. G. M. “meaned not so, neither did Mark has made the “PRODI. his heart think so,” yet in the opinion GIOUS” discovery, that the compariof every competent judge, the attribut- son at the close of Lord Byron's admia ing to me the office of a writer in one rable delineation of Henry Kirko of our oldest and ablest reviews, is an White, is to be found in “Waller's important concession that Aristarchus Poems." You are no doubt aware, is deemed by G. M. in private, to be a Sir, that the simile alluded to is of
Eastern origin, that it is to be found the refutation of his second letter, in the Greek tragedies of Euripides, should they deem the ipse dixit of and that it has been made use of by such a writer worthy of their notice. most of the poets of Europe. But- Mark concludes with a travestie of and “here's the rub”-in none of them Lord Byron's Corsair; but as a proof is it carried out with so much beauty, how senseless it is, the Eclectic reor applied with so much justice, as viewer--and no one will suspect an by Lord Byron. If your readers will evangelical writer of partiality to a compare his Lordship’s exemplifica- deist—in his analysis of this very tion of it (col. 1023) with Waller's “Corsair,” (after giving a very long verse in “ which he used to soar so extract) declares that there is high,” (col. 1123,) they will observe THING THE WHOLE COMPASS OF Lord Byron's vast superiority. Of engliSH POETRY THAT TRANSCENDS my two opponents, Mark Etheridge THIS FOR BEAUTY AND PAThos.” So has ball without powder, and G. M. much for Mark Etheridge's discernpowder without ball.
ment!—The letters of Anti-Byron and May 4.
three F.'s, are more an attack upon At the expiration of several months, the other admirers of Lord Byron's the interest which the Byronic contro- poems than upon myself. As both versy generally exc must be these writers condemn the tendency of greatly diminished, and it will there his Lordsbip's productions, it is fortufore be necessary to notice my new
nate for the admirers of the noble opponents as briefly as possible. poet, that the very same number of
the “Imperial” which contained reite. “ New foes arise,
rations against the morality of Lord Threat'ning to bind our souls in iron chains."
Byron's poetry, should also contain a There is the greater propriety in practical refutation of those charges. giving a brief answer to the new wri- In your columns, Sir, (449 and 450,) ters, because, with the exception of the tendency” of those poems will LAMBDA's very sensible letter, little be found to accord with the best feel(if any) novelty has been adduced; ings of the human heart. Thas “the the old arguments, already refuted, bane and antidote are both before" are again brought forward, in a new your readers, and to their IMPARTIAL shape, and in a more inefficient man- judgment the question is cheerfully
G. J. writes worthy of a better left. “ The harp the monarch-mincause: his last letter was probably strel swept," for instance, the most intended by himself as a mere jeu de fastidious must admire, and “ Arisson esprit, and therefore it does not tarchus of old” would have eulocall for any particular notice. That gized. “nobody denies Lord Byron is a great Epsilon's chemical letter would have poet,” and that “every body owns his been less disgusting if it had correLordship writes under the influence of sponded with the signature by being PLENARY poetic inspiration," I am short E. A much abler writer than very happy to find G. J. maintains ; himself (G. J.) very properly says that as it clearly proves his opinion accords * soft words and hard arguments” are with my own, that the ridiculous at- best; but Epsilon bas reversed this tempt to degrade Lod Byron into a maxim. Short E. has crammed into plagiarist, has completely failed. I his “oration" plenty of what the will only further observe that, in L- ladies term “hard words," while his TERARY matters " he that believeth,” arguments are as soft as his pate. may take “part with an infidel.” The Apostle Paul—the very writer whom
“ A tale, told by an idiot,
Full of sound and fury, sigoifying nothing." he quotes-did not hesitate to approve, and to avail himself of, the
No writer on either side has so productions of infidel poets :* and such much “grandiloquent phrase" and authority I doubt not G. J. will deem ranting fustian, as Epsilon. This decisive. Mark Etheridge (formerly Owl, not Eagle” has even flown to Coleridge) has now fallen foul of Scrutator and Philo-Aristarchus: to
“The high sublime of deep absurd.” these gentlemen, therefore, I leave After a pompous and irrelevant in
troduction about "
epopee and the * Acts xvii, 28, and Titus i. 12,
drama," Epsilon has huddled Homer
and Byron, Julius Cæsar and Dryden, | less hackneyed. In the other parts of Balaam and Wordsworth, into his Epsilon's letter there are such inane “alembics, retorts, or crucibles," to attempts at ratiocination, enveloped undergo a "decomposition, distilla- in such mysticism and pomposity of tion, or sublimation;” but the whole language--verborum satis, spientiæ paresult short E. gives us is, “ froth and rim-that I should be ashamed to fume," and "SPLENETIC HUMOUR, ,” notice them. Throughout his letter, I with a sediment-I beg pardon, a was compelled to exclaim, “what is “ substratum” of “envy, hatred, and good is borrowed; and what is his malice, and all uncharitableness." own, is good for nothing.” Were I
In examining bis tit bit, there will to honour Epsilon with any further nobe found only one argument, or tice, he would, like his type Sir Fretgbost of an argument,” or even sha- ful Plagiary, be “rather pleased, than dow of a shade of one that savours of otherwise." originality. Epsilon asserts of the LAMBDA is a writer of quite a diffe“Wordsworthian blank verse," that rent stamp. To his letter may be “we have nothing since Milton, simile justly applied the expressive Italian aut secundum.” If short E. had been, proverb, --I will not say a man of " much read
“Il suo soldo val tredeci danari.” ing,” but of any information, he would have known that there really are such
Had only such advocates come forworks as Dr. Young's sublime “ Night ward on the side of Wordsworth, tho Thoughts,” and Cowper's incompara
question” would indeed have been ble “Task”-not to mention the fine
simple,” and soon decided. To de. “ blank verse" of such beautiful wri- scend from such letters as G. J.'s and ters as Addison, Thomson, Johnson, Lambda's, to the pathos of Epsilon's, Porteus, Akenside, Dryden, and a may well excite the exclamation “O host of others—and that compared stupendum saltum.” I exceedingly with these, the obscure and incompre- regret that the length to which my heosible “ blank verse of Words- letter has already extended, and the worth” must retire and hide its dimi- observations yet to be adduced, prepished head in “ double darkness clude my paying that particular attenwrapt.” If Epsilon had been at all tion to Lambda which he so pre-emiacquainted with literature, he would nently deserves. Lambda having honot have exposed himself to the deri nestly admitted that “ some parts of sion with which that part of his letter Wordsworth's poems are mean and was read by all parties; while the grovelling," the controversy is now other topics of his letter have been reduced to a question of degree-how taken up by writers far his superior, far that “mean and grovelling” style urged with greater force, and placed pervades . Wordsworth’s productions ; in a much more luminous point of and on this point perhaps we had botview.
ter adopt the elegant advice of Gay; Next to the approbation of the wise Nor be, nor I, the point determine, and good, I prize the dis-approbation Since different tastes please different verof the ignorant; and on this account
min." I am quite content that such a writer It is much to be lamented, that so as Epsilon, who slanders Mr. Hazlitt, judicious a writer as Lambda should Sir Richard Phillips, Mr. Gibbon, and have confined his observations on the Lord Byron, should also malign Aris- other side, to “ Beppo, Don Juan, tarchus. Epsilon's "praise is cen- and Cain.” Were these even entirely sure, and his censure praise.” given up, Lord Byron's genius would
Having folded down the commence- shine with undiminished lustre : ment of the 30th ode in Horace's 3d enough, and more than enough, would book, for the conclusion of my letter, remain, after ages have rolled away, kpowing that Lord Byron by his poe- to usher in Lord Byron's glorious try had erected a monumentum ære APOTHEOSis. Though I cannot admit perennius, &c. I regretted that Epsi- that the question respecting the supelon should have forced this truly beau- riority of the two poets ought to be tiful poem into the service of Words- decided by determining, wbich works worth. I shall now, however, endea- are best for children-since then Cavour to finish my letter with a classi- tullus must yield to Bavius—I will cal quotation, equally beautiful, and yet concede to Lambda (notwithstand