talents of mind. When we speak of genius, we always mean that which is original and inherent, not any thing produced or derived from what is external. But Mr. Voltaire, by faying the genius of Corneille has that fuperiority over our countryman, which a person of rank has over a man in a low station, born with the fame talents, perplexes the thing very much. It seems to carry the comparison from the Genius, to the Manner, of the writers. If that manner is preferable, which gives the most becoming fentiments and the noblest character to the principal person of his drama, there is no doubt but our Poet has perfectly established his fuperiority over his competitor; for it cannot be denied, that Cinna is un homme du peuple, (a low fellow,) compared to Brutus. Mr. Voltaire, in all the comparisons he has made between these authors, has not taken into the account that Shakespear has written the best comedy in our language: that the fame man fhould have had fuch variety of talents, as to have produced Macbeth and the Merry Wives of Windfor; is aftonishing. Where is there an inftance, among the Ancients or Moderns, of one Poet's uniting the fublime and pathetic, the boldest inventions of fiction, and the most just and accurate delineation of characters; and also poffeffing the vis comica in its highest perfection? The best French Poets have been those Who from the ancients like the ancients writ; and who have afpired to the secondary praise of good imitators: but all our critics allow Shakespear to be an original. Mr. Pope confeffes him to be more so than even Homer himself. It has been demonstrated with great ingenuity and candour, that he was deftitute of learning: the age was rude and void of taste; but what had a ftill more pernicious influence on his works, was, that the court and the univerfities, the statesman and scholars, affected a scientific jargon. An obfcurity of expreffion was thought the veil of wisdom and know 4 ledge: ledge and that mist common to the Morn and Eve of literature, which in fact proves it is not at its high meridian, was affectedly thrown over the writings, and even the converfation of the learned, who often preferred images distorted or magnified, to a fimple expofition of their thoughts. Shake fpear is never more worthy of the true cri tic's cenfure, than in thofe inftances im which he complies with this falfe pomp of manner. It was pardonable in a man of his rank, not to be more polite and delicate than his contemporaries; but we cannot fo eafily excuse such superiority of talents for ftooping to any affectation. I may perhaps be charged with partiality to my author, for not having indulged that malignant spirit of criticism, which delights in expofing every blemish. I have paffed over beauties and defects in the fame filence, where they have not effentially affected the great purposes of the drama. They are of fo palpable a nature, that the most inattentive reader must perceive them; the fplendor of his fine paffages is equally ftriking. It appears to me that the dramatic requires a different fpecies of criticifm from any other poetry. A drama is to be confidered in the light of a living body; regularity of features, grace of limbs, fmoothness and delicacy of complexion, cannot render it perfect, if it is not properly organized within, as well as beautiful in its external ftructure. Many a character in a play, like a handsome perfon paralytic, is inert, feeble, and totally unfit for its duties and offices, fo that its necessary exertions must be supplied by some substitute. The action is carried on much after the manner it is done in epic poetry, by the help of description and narra→ tion, and a series of detached parts. It is unfair to judge fingly of every line, in a work where the merit depends on the result of various operations, and repeated efforts to obtain a particular end. Works without genius are ufually regularly dull, and coldly correct, resembling those living characters that want, while. They They dream the blank of life along, Senfe to be right, and paffion to be wrong.* Some allowances must be made to those who are more animated and more employed, if in the bustle of great actions, and the exertion of great powers, they fall into fome little errors. The genius of Shakefpear is fo extenfive and profound, I have reason to fear a greater number of excellencies have escaped my difcernment, than I have suffered faults to pass without my animadverfion: but I hope this weak attempt to vindicate our great dramatic Poet, will excite fome critic able to do him more ample justice. In that confidence I have left untouched many of his pieces, which deferve the protection of more judicious zeal, and Akilful care. |