Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

the same purpose, are the excellent directions with which Quinctilian concludes his discourse concerning figures, 1. ix. c. 3. " Ego illud de iis figuris

[ocr errors]

quæ veræ fiunt, adjiciam breviter, sicut ornant "orationem opportunæ positæ, ita ineptissimas esse

[ocr errors]

cum immodice petuntur. Sunt, qui neglecto re66 rum pondere et viribus sententiarum, si vel inania "verba in hos modos depravarunt, summos se ju"dicant artifices; ideoque non desinunt eas nectere; • quas sine sententia sectare, tam est ridiculum quam quærere habitum gestumque sine corpore. "Ne hæ quidem quæ rectæ fiunt, densandæ sunt "nimis. Sciendum imprimis quid quisque postulet "locus, quid persona, quid tempus. Major enim cc pars harum figurarum posita est in delectatione. "Ubi vero, atrocitate, invidia, miseratione pug"nandum est; quis ferat verbis contrapositis, et "consimilibus, et pariter cadentibus, irascentem, "flentem, rogantem? Cum in his rebus, cura ver"borum deroget affectibus fidem; et ubicunque <c ars ostentatur, veritas abesse videatur *." After

* "I must add concerning those figures which are proper "in themselves, that, as they beautify a composition when they 66 are seasonably introduced, so they deform it greatly if too "frequently sought after. There are some, who, neglecting "strength of sentiment and weight of matter, if they can only "force their empty words into a figurative style, imagine themselves great writers; and therefore continually string toge"ther such ornaments; which is just as ridiculous, where "there is no sentiment to support them, as to contrive gestures

these judicious and useful observations, I have no more to add, on this subject, except this admonition,

In the fourth place, that without a genius for figurative language, none should attempt it. Imagination is a power not to be acquired; it must be derived from nature. Its redundancies we may prune, its deviations we may correct, its sphere we may enlarge; but the faculty itself we cannot create; and all efforts towards a metaphorical ornamented style, if we are destitute of the proper genius for it, will prove awkward and disgusting. Let us satisfy ourselves, however, by considering that without this talent, or at least with a very small measure of it, we may both write and speak to advantage. Good sense, clear ideas, perspicuity of language, and proper arrangement of words and thoughts, will always command attention. These are, indeed, the foundations of all solid merit, both in speaking and writing. Many subjects require nothing more: and

[ocr errors]

"and dresses for what wants a body. Even those figures "which a subject admits, must not come too thick. We must begin with considering what the occasion, the time, and the "6 person who speaks, render proper. For the object aimed at "by the greater part of these figures is entertainment. But "when the subject becomes deeply serious, and strong pas. 86 sions are to be moved, who can hear the orator, who, in af. "fected language and balanced phrases, endeavours to express "wrath, commiseration, or earnest entreaty? On all such oc"casions, a solicitous attention to words weakens passion; "and when so much art is shewn, there is suspected to be lit. "tle sincerity."

those which admit of ornament, admit it only as a secondary requisite. To study and to know our own genius well; to follow nature; to seek to improve, but not to force it; are directions which cannot be too often given to those who desire to excel in the liberal arts.

WHEN I entered on the consideration of style, I observed that words being the copies of our ideas, there must always be a very intimate connection between the manner in which every writer employs words, and his manner of thinking; and that, from the peculiarity of thought and expression which belongs to him, there is a certain character imprinted on his style, which may be denominated his manner; commonly expressed by such general terms, as strong, weak, dry, simple, affected, or the like. These distinctions carry, in general, some reference to an author's manner of thinking, but refer chiefly to his mode of expression. They arise from the whole tenour of his language; and comprehend the effect produced by all those parts of style which we have already considered; the choice which he makes of single words; his arrangement of these in sentences; the degree of his precision ; and his embellishment, by means of musical cadence, figures, or other arts of speech. Of such general characters of style, therefore, it remains now to speak, as the result of those underparts of which I have hitherto treated.

THAT different subjects require to be treated of in different sorts of style, is a position so obvious, that I shall not stay to illustrate it. Every one sees that treatises of philosophy, for instance, ought not to be composed in the same style with orations. Every one sees also, that different parts of the same composition require a variation in the style and manner. In a sermon, for instance, or any harangue, the application or peroration admits more ornament, and requires more warmth, than the didactic part. But what I mean at present to remark is, that, amidst this variety, we still expect to find, in the compositions of any one man, some degree of uniformity or consistency with himself in manner; we expect to find some predominant character of style impressed on all his writings, which shall be suited to, and shall mark, his particular genius and turn of mind. The orations in Livy differ much in style, as they ought to do, from the rest of his history. The same is the case with those in Tacitus. Yet both in Livy's orations, and in those of Tacitus, we are able clearly to trace the distinguishing manner of each historian; the magnificent fulness of the one, and the sententious conciseness of the other. The "Lettres Persanes," and " L'Esprit de Loix," are the works of the same author. They required very different composition surely, and accordingly they differ widely; yet still we see the same hand. Wherever there is real and native genius, it gives a determination to one kind of style rather than

another. Where nothing of this appears; where there is no marked nor peculiar character in the compositions of any author, we are apt to infer, not without reason, that he is a vulgar and trivial author, who writes from imitation, and not from the impulse of original genius. As the most celebrated painters are known by their hand, so the best and most original writers are known and distinguished, throughout all their works, by their style and peCuliar manner. This will be found to hold almost

without exception.

THE ancient critics attended to these general characters of style which we are now to consider. Dionysius of Halicarnassus divides them into three kinds, and calls them the austere, the florid, and the middle. By the austere he means a style distinguished for strength and firmness, with a neglect of smoothness and ornament; for examples of which, he gives Pindar and Eschylus among the poets, and Thucydides among the prose writers. By the florid, he means, as the name indicates, a style ornamented, flowing, and sweet; resting more upon numbers and grace, than strength; he instances Hesiod, Sappho, Anacreon, Euripides, and principally Isocrates. The middle kind is the just mean between these, and comprehends the beauties of both; in which class he places Homer and Sophocles among the poets; in prose, Herodotus, Demosthenes, Plato, and (what seems strange) Aristotle. This must be a very wide class indeed,

« ÎnapoiContinuă »