The Augustan Reprint Society ESSAYS ON TASTE from John Gilbert Cooper _Letters Concerning Taste_ Third Edition (1757) & John Armstrong _Miscellanies_ (1770) With an Introduction by Ralph Cohen Publication Number 30 Los Angeles William Andrews Clark Memorial Library University of California _GENERAL EDITORS_ H. RICHARD ARCHER, _Clark Memorial Library_ RICHARD C. BOYS. , _University of Michigan_ EDWARD NILES HOOKER, _University of California, Los Angeles_ JOHN LOFTIS, _University of California, Los Angeles_ _ASSISTANT EDITOR_ W. EARL BRITTON, _University of Michigan_ _ADVISORY EDITORS_ EMMETT L. AVERY, _State College of Washington_ BENJAMIN BOYCE, _Duke University_ LOUIS I. BREDVOLD, _University of Michigan_ CLEANTH BROOKS, _Yale University_ JAMES L. CLIFFORD, _Columbia University_ ARTHUR FRIEDMAN, _University of Chicago_ LOUIS A. LANDA, _Princeton University_ SAMUEL H. MONK, _University of Minnesota_ ERNEST MOSSNER, _University of Texas_ JAMES SUTHERLAND, _Queen Mary College, London_ H. T. SWEDENBERG, JR. , _University of California, Los Angeles_ INTRODUCTION The essays on taste taken from the work of John Gilbert Cooper andJohn Armstrong and reprinted in this issue are of interest and valueto the student of the eighteenth century because they typify theshifting attitudes toward taste held by most mid-century poets andcritics. Cooper, who accepts the Shaftesbury-Hutchesonian thesis ofthe internal sense, emphasizes the personal, ecstatic effect of taste. Armstrong, while accepting the rationalist notions of clarityand simplicity, attacks methodized rules and urges reliance onindividuality. Following Shaftesbury and Hutcheson closely, Cooper treats taste as animmediate, prerational response of an internal sense to the proportionand harmony in nature, a response from an internal harmony of thesenses, imagination, and understanding to a similar harmony inexternal nature. Cooper defines the effect of good taste as a "Glowof Pleasure which thrills thro' our whole Frame. " This "Glow" ischaracterized by high emotional sensibility, and it thus minimizes thepassivity which Hutcheson attributes to the internal sense. Armstrong's sources are more eclectic than Cooper's. Armstrong showssimilarities to Pope in his rationalism, to Dennis in his treatmentof poetry as an expression of the passions, and to Hutcheson in hisemphasis on benevolence and the psychological basis of perception. But to these views, he frequently adds personal eccentricities. Forexample, _Taste: An Epistle to a Young Critic_ reveals its Popeandescent in its tone and form; however, its gastronomic ending displaysArmstrong's interest, as a physician, in the relation of diet toliterary taste. If Armstrong's boast that "I'm a shrewd observer, and will guess What books you doat on from your fav'rite mess, " isa personal eccentricity, his attack on false criticism and hisexhortation to judge for oneself are typical harbingers of lateeighteenth-century individualism and confidence in the "natural" man. An honest farmer, or shepherd [writes Armstrong in "Of Taste"], who is acquainted with no language but what is spoken in his own county, may have a much truer relish of the _English_ writers than the most dogmatical pedant that ever erected himself into a commentator, and from his _Gothic_ chair, with an ill-bred arrogance, dictated false criticism to the gaping multitude. [1] [Footnote 1: John Armstrong, _Miscellanies_ (London, 1770), II, 137. ] Cooper and Armstrong both hold a historically intermediate positionin their attitudes toward taste, accepting early eighteenth-centuryassumptions and balancing them with late eighteenth-century emphases. Neither of them abandons the moral assumption of art which, asArmstrong explains it, is a belief in "a standard of right and wrongin the nature of things, of beauty and deformity, both in the naturaland moral world. "[2] Cooper, who defines taste as a thrilling responseto art, falls back upon Hutcheson in minimizing the importance ofart and making it secondary to moral knowledge. Armstrong, whiledescribing taste as the sensitive discrimination of degrees of beautyand deformity, bases this discrimination not on artistic, but on moralqualities. [Footnote 2: _Ibid. _, II, 134. ] The complete transition from classic to romantic premises of taste ischaracterized by the separation of art from morals. This step neitherCooper nor Armstrong takes. But they do exhibit tendencies whichexplain how the shift was made possible. Both writers insist on a feltresponse to a work of art. Cooper emphasizes that this response mustbe to the whole work. This assumption implies that a work of art isan entity complete in itself; it makes possible the argument thatart conveys artistic, not moral knowledge. Cooper, by stressingsensibility as an effect of taste, suggests the Wordsworthian notionthat the poet is more sensitive than other people. Armstrong, in addition to his hostility to formal criticism and hisconfidence in the natural man, reveals three other tendencies whichlater eighteenth-century critics elaborated. Like Edward Young in his_Conjectures on Original Composition_, 1759, Armstrong opposes slavishimitation of ancient models and declares that the writer should "catchtheir graces without affecting it [them]" so that his "own originalcharacteristical manner will still distinguish itself. "[3] Armstrongemphasizes exquisiteness of perception as the basis for taste: themore exquisite the mind, the more is it able to discriminate amongthe various degrees of the beautiful and the deformed. Although latercritics repudiate Armstrong's moral discrimination, they transformit into a refined discrimination of aesthetic qualities. Finally, bysuggesting that the man of genius differs from the man of taste byhis ability to handle a medium, Armstrong implies the possibility ofa technical criticism in terms of the writer's craft, apart from moraljudgment. [Footnote 3: _Ibid. _, II, 168. ] Although the works of Cooper and Armstrong elicited contrastingpopular reactions--_Letters concerning Taste_ running into foureditions from 1755 to 1771 and Armstrong's writings, with theexception of _The Art of Preserving Health_, never winning much publicfavor--neither writer exerted a strong critical influence. Cooper didnot reassess or change significantly the assumptions of Shaftesburyand Hutcheson. His work was primarily a popularization of their ideas, and, in its enthusiastic language, its emphasis on sensibility, and its epistolary form, it seems directed at flattering a femaleaudience. Armstrong's remarks on taste, written in imitation ofthe simplicity and clarity of the rational tradition, are personalassertions and opinions rather than well-defined or clearlythought-out critical positions. They are random thoughts rather than acoherent critical theory. The significance of Cooper and Armstrong rests, therefore, on certainrepresentative attitudes toward taste which exhibit the change"from classic to romantic. " On the one hand, they accept the moralpostulates of art, and, on the other, they emphasize the emotionalbasis of taste. Cooper treats art as a secondary form of knowledge, yet emphasizes the thrill that art gives. Armstrong acceptsthe standards of clarity and simplicity, while emphasizing theindividuality of response and the need for discriminating particular, rather than general, qualities. Though Cooper and Armstrong fail torevaluate the traditions they accept, they exemplify trends whichled others to perform this revaluation and to transform the moralassumptions into aesthetic criteria. Bibliographical Note The two reprints from the twenty letters of John Gilbert Cooper's_Letters concerning Taste. To which are added Essays on similar andother Subjects_ are from the third edition, dated 1757; the firstedition was published in 1755 as _Letters concerning Taste_. The selections by John Armstrong are taken from the two-volume_Miscellanies_ published in 1770. "The Taste of the Present Age"received its first publication in this edition, but the other prosehad previously been published in 1758 under the pseudonym of LauncelotTemple in the first volume of _Sketches: or Essays on VariousSubjects_. The poem _Taste: An Epistle to a Young Critic_ was firstpublished in 1753. Ralph Cohen LETTERS CONCERNING TASTE. LETTER I. To EUPHEMIUS. Whence comes it, EUPHEMIUS, that you, who are _feelingly_ alive toeach fine Sensation that Beauty or Harmony gives the Soul, should sooften assert, contrary to what you daily experience, _that_ TASTE _isgoverned by Caprice, and that_ BEAUTY _is reducible to no Criterion?_I am afraid your Generosity in this Instance is greater than yourSincerity, and that you are willing to compliment the circle of yourFriends, in giving up by this Concession that envied Superiority youmight claim over them, should it be acknowledged that those uncommonEmotions of Pleasure, which arise in your Breast upon the Observationof moral or natural Elegance, were caused by a more ready and intimatePerception of that universal TRUTH, which the all-perfect CREATORof this harmonious System ordained to be the VENUS of every Object, whether in the Material World; in the imitative Arts; or in livingCharacters and Manners. How irreconcileable are your Doctrines to theExample you afford us! However, since you press me to justify yourPractice against your Declarations, by giving a Definition of what ismeant by TASTE, I shall not avoid the invidious Office of pointing outyour superior Excellence to others, by proving that TRUTH and BEAUTYare coincident, and that the warmest Admirers of these CELESTIALTWINS, have consequently Souls more nearly allied to ætherial Spiritsof a higher Order. The effect of a _good_ TASTE is that instantaneousGlow of Pleasure which thrills thro' our whole Frame, and seizes uponthe Applause of the Heart, before the intellectual Power, Reason, candescend from the Throne of the Mind to ratify it's Approbation, eitherwhen we receive into the Soul beautiful Images thro' the Organsof bodily Senses; or the Decorum of an amiable Character thro' theFaculties of moral Perception; or when we recall, by the imitativeArts, both of them thro' the intermediate Power of the Imagination. Nor is this delightful and immediate Sensation to be excited in anundistempered Soul, but by a Chain of Truths, dependent upon oneanother till they terminate in the hand of the Divine COMPOSER of thewhole. Let us cast our Eyes first upon the Objects of the MaterialWorld. A rural Prospect upon the very first Glance yields a gratefulEmotion in the Breast, when in a Variety of Scenes there arises fromthe whole ONE Order, whose different Parts will be found, by thecritical Eye of Contemplation, to relate mutually to one another, and each examined apart, to be productive of the Necessaries, theConveniencies, and Emoluments of Life. Suppose you was to behold froman Eminence, thro' a small range of Mountains covered with Woods, several little Streams gushing out of Rocks, some gently tricklingover Pebbles, others tumbling from a Precipice, and a few glidingsmoothly in Willow-shaded Rivulets thro green Meadows, till theirtributary Waters are all collected by some River God of a larger Urn, who at some few Miles distance is lost in the Ocean, which heavesit's broad Bosom to the Sight, and ends the Prospect with an immenseExpanse of Waters. Tell me, EUPHEMIUS, would not such a Scenecaptivate the Heart even before the intellectual Powers discoverMinerals in the Mountains; future Navies in the Woods; Civil andMilitary Architecture in the Rocks; healing Qualities in the smallerStreams; Fertility, that the larger Waters distribute along theirserpentising Banks; Herbage for Cattle in the Meadows; and lastly, the more easy Opportunities the River affords us to convey to otherClimates the Superfluities of our own, for which the Ocean brings usback in Exchange what we stand in need of from theirs. Now to heightenthis beautiful Landscape, let us throw in Corn Fields, here and therea Country Seat, and, at proper Distances, small Hamlets, together withSpires and Towers, as MILTON describes them, "bosom'd high in tufted Trees. " Does not an additional Rapture flow in from this Adjunct, of whichReason will afterwards discover the latent Cause in the same manneras before. Your favourite Architecture will not fail to afford lessremarkable Instances, that Truth, Beauty, and Utility are inseparable. You very well know that every Rule, Canon, and Proportion in buildingdid not arise from the capricious Invention of Man, but from theunerring Dictates of Nature, and that even what are now the ornamentalParts of an Edifice, originally were created by Necessity; and arestill displeasing to the Sight, when they are disobedient, if I mayuse that moral Expression, to the Order, which Nature, whose Lawscannot be repealed, first gave to supply that Necessity. Here I appealto your own Breast, and let me continue the Appeal by asking youconcerning another Science analogous to this, which is founded upon asinvariable Principles: I mean the Science of living well, in whichyou are as happily learned as in the former. Say then, has not everyamiable Character, with which you have been enamoured, been proved bya cool Examination to contain a _beautiful_ Proportion, in the Pointit was placed in, relative to Society? And what is it that constitutesMoral Deformity, or what we call Vice, but the Disproportion which anyAgent occasions, in the Fabric of Civil Community, by a Non-complianceto the general _Order_ which should prevail in it? As the Arts of Painting, Sculpture, and Poetry are imitative of these, their Excellence, as ARISTOTLE observes, consists in Faithfulness totheir Original: nor have they any _primary_ Beauty in themselves, butderive their shadowy Existence in a mimetic Transcript from Objectsin the Material World, or from Passions, Characters, and Manners. Nevertheless that _internal Sense_ we call TASTE (which is a Heraldfor the whole human System, in it's three different Parts, therefined Faculties of Perception, the gross Organs of Sense, and theintermediate Powers of Imagination) has as quick a Feeling of thissecondary Excellence of the Arts, as for the primary Graces; andseizes the Heart with Rapture long before the Senses, and Reason inConjunction, can _prove_ this Beauty by collating the Imitations withtheir Originals. If it should be asked _why_ external Objects affect the human Breastin this Manner, I would answer, that the ALMIGHTY has in this, as wellas in all his other Works, out of his abundant Goodness and Love tohis Creatures, so _attuned_ our Minds to Truth, that all Beauty fromwithout should make a responsive Harmony vibrate within. But shouldany of those more curious Gentlemen, who busy themselves WithEnquiries into Matters, which the Deity, for Reasons known only tohimself, has placed above our limited Capacities, demand _how_ he hasso formed us, I should refer them, with proper Contempt, to their moreaged Brethren, who may justly in Derision be stiled _the Philosophersof ultimate Causes_. To you, my dear Friend, whose truly philosophicaland religious Taste concludes that whatever GOD ordains is right, it is sufficient to have proved that _Truth_ is the Cause of all_Beauty_, and that Truth flows from the Fountain of all Perfection, inwhose unfathomable Depth finite Thought should never venture withany other Intention than to wonder and adore. But I find I have beenimperceptibly led on from Thought to Thought, not only to trespassupon the common Stile of a Letter, by these abstruse Reasonings andreligious Conclusions, but upon the ordinary length of one likewise;therefore shall conclude by complimenting my own Taste in Characters, when I assure you that I am, _Your most affectionate Friend_, &c. LETTER II. To the SAME. It gave me no small Pleasure to find, by your Answer to my lastLetter, that you now allow BEAUTY to be the Daughter of TRUTH; and Iin my turn will make a Concession to you, by confessing that BEAUTYherself may have _acquired_ Charms, but then they are altogether suchas are consistent with her divine Extraction. What you observe isvery true, that the human Form (the most glorious Object, as you arepleased to call it, in the Creation) let it be made with the mostaccurate Symmetry and Proportion, may receive _additional_ Charms fromEducation, and steal more subtily upon the Soul of the Beholder fromsome adventitious Circumstances of easy Attitudes or Motion, and anundefineable Sweetness of Countenance, which an habitual Commerce withthe more refined Part of Mankind superadds to the Work of Nature. Thisthe ancient _Grecian_ Artists would have represented mythologicallyin Painting by the GRACES crowning VENUS. We find how much LELY hasavailed himself in his shadowy Creations of transcribing from Lifethis adventitious Charm into all his Portraits. I mean, when he_stole_ upon his _animated Canvas_, as POPE poetically expresses it, "The sleepy Eye that spoke the melting Soul. " You will ask me, perhaps, how I can prove any Alliance in thisparticular Circumstance of a single Feature to Truth; Or rathertriumphantly push the Argument farther, and say, Is not thisadditional Charm, as you call it, inconsistent with the DivineOriginal of Beauty, since it deadens the fiery Lustre of thatpenetrating Organ? I chuse to draw my Answer from the Schools of theantient ETHOGRAPHI, who by their enchanting Art so happily conveyed, thro' the Sight, the Lessons of Moral Philosophy. These Sages wouldhave told you, that our Souls are attuned to one another, like theStrings of musical Instruments, and that the Chord of one beingstruck, the _Unison_ of another, tho' untouched, will vibrate to it. The Passions therefore of the human Heart, expressed either in theliving Countenance, or the mimetic Strokes of Art, will affect theSoul of the Beholder with a similar and responsive Disposition. Whatwonder then is it that Beauty, borrowing thus the Look of softeningLove, whose Power can lull the most watchful of the Senses, should cast that sweet _Nepenthe_ upon our Hearts, and enchant ourcorresponding Thoughts to rest in the Embraces of Desire? Sure thenI am, that you will always allow Love to be the Source and End of ourBeing, and consequently consistent with Truth. It is the Superadditionof such Charms to Proportion, which is called _Taste_ in Musick, Painting, Poetry, Sculpture, Gardening and Architecture. By which isgenerally meant that happy Assemblage which excites in our Minds, byAnalogy, some pleasurable Image. Thus, for Instance, even the Ruinsof an old Castle properly disposed, or the Simplicity of a rough hewnHermitage in a Rock, enliven a Prospect, by recalling the Moral Imagesof _Valor_ and _Wisdom_; and I believe no Man will contend, that Valorexerted in the Defence of one's Country, or Wisdom contemplating inRetirement for the Welfare of Mankind, are not truly amiable Images, belonging to the Divine Family of Truth. I think I have now reconciledour two favorite Opinions, by proving that these _additional_ Charms, if they must be called so, have their Origin in Nature as much asProportion itself. --I am very glad the Prints I sent afforded you somuch Pleasure, not only as I wish every thing which comes from me maybe favorably received by you, but as they are likewise a Confirmationof my Arguments; for the Man who drew them is no very great Artist, but being a faithful Disciple of Nature, having delineated everyObject in a _Camera Obscura_, he has not failed of gaining theuncontested Applause, which the Followers of that unerring Mistresswill ever receive from Mankind. My EUDOCIA calls me to administerwith her Comfort to a little fatherless Family in the District of ourHamlet, therefore must conclude myself, _Your sincere Friend_, &c. LETTER TASTE: AN EPISTLE TO A YOUNG CRITIC. Range from Tower-hill all London to the Fleet, Thence round the Temple, t'utmost Grosvenor-street: Take in your route both Gray's and Lincoln's Inn; Miss not, be sure, my Lords and Gentlemen; You'll hardly raise, as I with[A] _Petty_ guess, } 5 Above twelve thousand men of taste; unless } In desperate times a _Connoisseur_ may pass. } "A Connoisseur! What's that?" 'Tis hard to say: But you must oft amidst the fair and gay Have seen a wou'd-be rake, a fluttering fool, 10 Who swears he loves the sex with all his soul. Alas, vain youth! dost thou admire sweet Jones? Thou be gallant without or blood or bones! You'd split to hear th' insipid coxcomb cry Ah charming Nanny! 'tis too much! I die!-- 15 Die and be d--n'd, says one; but let me tell ye I'll pay the loss if ever rapture kill ye. [Footnote A: Sir William Petty, author of the _Political Arithmetic_. ] 'Tis easy learnt the art to talk by rote: At Nando's 'twill but cost you half a groat; The Redford school at three-pence is not dear, Sir; At White's--_the stars instruct you_ for a tester. 21 But he, whom nature never meant to share One spark of taste, will never catch it there:-- Nor no where else; howe'er the booby beau Grows great with Pope, and Horace, and Boileau. Good native Taste, tho' rude, is seldom wrong, Be it in music, painting, or in song. But this, as well as other faculties, Improves with age and ripens by degrees. I know, my dear; 'tis needless to deny 't, 30 You like Voiture, you think him wondrous bright; But seven years hence, your relish more matur'd, What now delights will hardly be endur'd. The boy may live to taste Racine's fine charms, Whom Lee's bald orb or Rowe's dry rapture warms: But he, enfranchis'd from his tutor's care, 36 Who places Butler near Cervantes' chair; Or with Erasmus can admit to vie Brown of Squab-hall _of merry memory_; Will die a Goth: and nod at [A]Woden's feast, 40 Th' eternal winter long, on [B]Gregory's breast. Long may he swill, this patriarch of the dull, The drowsy Mum--But touc not Maro's skull! His holy barbarous dotage sought to doom, Good heaven! th' immortal classics to the tomb!-- Those sacred lights shall bid new genius rise 45 When all Rome's saints have rotted from the skies. Be these your guides, if at the ivy crown You aim; each country's classics, and your own. But chiefly with the ancients pass your prime, 50 And drink Castalia at the fountain's brim. The man to genuine Burgundy bred up, Soon starts the dam of Methuen in his cup. [Footnote A: Alluding to the Gothic heaven, Woden's hall; where the happy are for ever employed in drinking beer, mum, and other comfortable liquors out of the skulls of those whom they had slain in battle. ] [Footnote B: Pope Gregory the VIth, distinguished by the name of St. Gregory; whose pious zeal, in the cause of barbarous ignorance and priestly tyranny, exerted itself in demolishing, to the utmost of his power, all the remains of heathen genius. ] Those sovereign masters of the Muses skill Are the true patterns of good writing still, 55 Their ore was rich and seven times purg'd of lead; Their art seem'd nature, 'twas so finely hid. Tho' born with all the powers of writing well, What pains it cost they did not blush to tell. Their ease (my Lords!) ne'er lowng'd for want of fire, Nor did their rage thro' affectation tire. 61 Free from all tawdry and imposing glare They trusted to their native grace of air. Rapt'rous and wild the trembling soul they seize, } Or sly coy beauties steal it by degrees; } 65 The more you view them still the more they please. } Yet there are thousands of scholastic merit Who worm their sense out but ne'er taste their spirit. Witness each pedant under Bentley bred; Each commentator that e'er commented. 70 (You scarce can seize a spot of classic ground, With leagues of Dutch morass so floated round. ) Witness--but, Sir, I hold a cautious pen, Lest I should _wrong_ some _honourable men_. They grow enthusiasts too--_'Tis true! 'tis pity!_ 75 But 'tis not every lunatic that's witty. Some have run Maro--and some Milton--mad, Ashley once turn'd a solid barber's head: Hear all that's said or printed if you can, Ashley has turn'd more solid heads than one. 80 Let such admire each great or specious name; For right or wrong the joy to them's the same. "Right!" Yes a thousand times. --Each fool has heard That Homer was a wonder of a bard. Despise them civilly with all my heart-- 85 But to convince them is a desperate part, Why should you teize one for what secret cause One doats on Horace, or on Hudibras? 'Tis cruel, Sir, 'tis needless, to endeavour To teach a sot of Taste he knows no flavour, 90 To disunite I neither wish nor hope A stubborn blockhead from his fav'rite fop. Yes--fop I say, were Maro's self before 'em: For Maro's self grows dull as they pore o'er him. But hear their raptures o'er some specious rhime Dub'd by the musk'd and greasy mob sublime. 96 For spleen's dear sake hear how a coxcomb prates As clam'rous o'er his joys as fifty cats; _"Music has charms to sooth a savage breast, To soften rocks, and oaks"_--and all the rest: 100 _"I've heard"_--Bless these long ears!--"Heav'ns what a strain! Good God! What thunders burst in this _Campaign_! Hark Waller warbles! Ah! how sweetly killing! Then that inimitable Splendid Shilling! Rowe breathes all Shakespear here!--That ode of Prior 105 Is Spencer quite! egad his very fire!-- As like"--Yes faith! as gum-flowers to the rose, Or as to Claret flat Minorca's dose; As like as (if I am not grosly wrong) Erle Robert's Mice to aught e'er Chaucer sung. 110 Read boldly, and unprejudic'd peruse Each fav'rite modern, ev'n each ancient muse. With all the comic salt and tragic rage The great stupendous genius of our stage, Boast of our island, pride of human-kind, 115 Had faults to which the boxes are not blind. His frailties are to ev'ry gossip known: Yet Milton's pedantries not shock the town. Ne'er be the dupe of Names, however high; For some outlive good parts, some misapply. 120 Each elegant Spectator you admire; But must you therefore swear by Cato's fire? Masques for the court, and oft a clumsey jest, Disgrac'd the muse that wrought the Alchemist. "But to the ancients. "--Faith! I am not clear, 125 For all the smooth round type of Elzevir, That every work which lasts in prose or song, Two thousand years, deserves to last so long. For not to mention some eternal blades Known only now in th' academic shades, 130 (Those sacred groves where raptur'd spirits stray, And in word-hunting waste the live-long day) Ancients whom none but curious critics scan, Do, read[A] Messala's praises if you can. Ah! who but feels the sweet contagious smart 135 While soft Tibullus pours his tender heart? With him the Loves and Muses melt in tears; But not a word of some hexameters. "You grow so squeamish and so dev'lish dry, You'll call Lucretius vapid next. " Not I. 140 Some find him tedious, others think him lame: But if he lags his subject is to blame. Rough weary roads thro' barren wilds he tried, Yet still he marches with true Roman pride: Sometimes a meteor, gorgeous, rapid, bright, 145 He streams athwart the philosophic night. Find you in Horace no insipid Odes?-- He dar'd to tell us Homer sometimes nods; And but for such a aide's hardy skill Homer might slumber unsuspected still. 150 [Footnote A: A poem of Tibullus's in hexameter verse; as yawning and insipid as his elegies are tender and natural. ] Tasteless, implicit, indolent and tame, At second-hand we chiefly praise or blame. Hence 'tis, for else one knows not why nor how, Some authors flourish for a year or two: For many some, more wond'rous still to tell; 155 Farquhar yet lingers on the brink of hell. Of solid merit others pine unknown; } At first, tho'[A] Carlos swimmingly went down, } Poor Belvidera fail'd to melt the town. } Sunk in dead night the giant Milton lay 160 'Till Sommer's hand produc'd him to the day. But, thanks to heav'n and Addison's good grace Now ev'ry fop is charm'd with Chevy Chace. [Footnote A: Don Carlos, a tragedy of Otway's, now long and justly forgotten, went off with great applause; while his Orphan, a somewhat better performance, and what is yet more strange, his Venice Preserved, according to the theatrical anecdotes of those times, met with a very cold reception. ] Specious and sage, the sovereign of the flock Led to the downs, or from the wave-worn rock 165 Reluctant hurl'd, the tame implicit train Or crop the downs, or headlong seek the main. As blindly we our solemn leaders follow, And good, and bad, and execrable swallow. Pray, on the first throng'd evening of a play 170 That wears the[A] _facies hippocratica_, Strong lines of death, signs dire of reprobation; Have you not seen the angel of salvation Appear sublime; with wise and solemn rap To teach the doubtful rabble where to clap?-- 175 The rabble knows not where our dramas shine; But where the cane goes pat--_by G-- that's fine_! [Footnote A: The appearance of the face in the last stage of a consumption, as it is described by Hippocrates. ] Judge for yourself; nor wait with timid phlegm Till some illustrious pedant hum or hem. 179 The lords who starv'd old Ben were learn'dly fond Of Chaucer, whom with bungling toil they conn'd, Their sons, whose ears bold Milton could not seize, } Would laugh o'er Ben like mad, and snuff and sneeze, } And swear, and seem as tickled as you please. } Their spawn, the pride of this sublimer age, 185 Feel to the toes and horns grave Milton's rage. Tho' liv'd he now he might appeal with scorn To Lords, Knights, 'Squires and Doctors, yet unborn; Or justly mad to Moloch's burning fane Devote the choicest children of his brain. 190 Judge for yourself; and as you find report. Of wit as freely as of beef or port. Zounds! shall a pert or bluff important wight, Whose brain is fanciless, whose blood is white; A mumbling ape of taste; prescribe us laws 195 To try the poets, for no better cause Than that he boasts _per ann. _ ten thousand clear, Yelps in the House, or barely sits a Peer? For shame! for shame! the liberal British soul To stoop to any stale dictator's rule! 200 I may be wrong, and often am no doubt, But right or wrong with friends with foes 'twill out. Thus 'tis perhaps my fault if I complain Of trite invention and a flimsy vein, Tame characters, uninteresting, jejune, 205 And passions drily copied from [A]Le Brun. For I would rather never judge than wrong That friend of all men, generous Fenelon. But in the name of goodness, must I be 210 The dupe of charms I never yet could see? And then to flatter where there's no reward-- Better be any patron-hunting bard, Who half our Lords with filthy praise besmears, And sing an Anthem to ALL MINISTERS: Taste th' Attic salt in ev'ry Peer's poor rebus, 215 And crown each Gothic idol for a Phoebus. [Footnote A: First painter to Lewis XIV. Who, to speak in fashionableFrench English, _called himself_ LEWIS THE GREAT. Our sovereign lordsthe passions, Love, Rage, Despair, &c. Were graciously pleased tosit to him in their turns for their portraits: which he was generousenough to communicate to the public; to the great improvement, nodoubt, of history-painting. It was he who they say poison'd Le Sueur;who, without half his advantages in many other respects, was sounreasonable and provoking as to display a genius with which his owncould stand no comparison. It was he and his Gothic disciples, who, with sly scratches, defac'd the most masterly of this Le Sueur'sperformances, as often as their barbarous envy could snugly reachthem. Yet after all these atchievements he died in his bed! Acatastrophe which could not have happened to him in a countrylike this, where the _fine arts_ are as zealously and judiciouslypatronised as they are well understood. ] Alas! so far from free, so far from brave, We dare not shew the little Taste we have. With us you'll see ev'n vanity controul The most refin'd sensations of the soul. 220 Sad Otway's scenes, great Shakespear's we defy: "Lord, Madam! 'tis so unpolite to cry!-- For shame, my dear! d'ye credit all this stuff?-- I vow--well, this is innocent enough?" At Athens long ago, the Ladies--(married) 225 Dreamt not they misbehav'd tho' they miscarried, When a wild poet with licentious rage Turn'd fifty furies loose upon the stage. They were so tender and so easy mov'd, Heav'ns! how the Grecian ladies must have lov'd! For all the fine sensations still have dwelt, 231 Perhaps, where one was exquisitely felt. Thus he who heavenly Maro truly feels Stands fix'd on Raphael, and at Handel thrills. The grosser senses too, the taste, the smell, } 235 Are likely truest where the fine prevail: } Who doubts that Horace must have cater'd well? } Friend, I'm a shrewd observer, and will guess What books you doat on from your fav'rite mess, Brown and L'Estrange will surely charm whome'er The frothy pertness strikes of weak small-beer. Who steeps the calf's fat loin in greasy sauce Will hardly loathe the praise that bastes an ass. Who riots on Scotcht Collops scorns not any Insipid, fulsome, trashy miscellany; 245 And who devours whate'er the cook can dish up, Will for a classic consecrate each[A] bishop. [Footnote A: See Felton's Classics. ] But I am sick of pen and ink; and you Will find this letter long enough. Adieu! OF GENIUS There is a standard of right and wrong in the nature of things, ofbeauty and deformity, both in the natural and moral world. And asdifferent minds happen to be more or less exquisite, the more or lesssensibly do they perceive the various degrees, of good and bad, andare the more or less susceptible of being charmed with what is rightor beautiful, and disgusted with what is wrong or deformed. It ischiefly this sensibility that constitutes genius; to which a soundhead and a good heart are as effectual as a lively imagination. And aman of true genius must necessarily have as exquisite a feeling of themoral beauties, as of whatever is great or beautiful in the worksof nature; or masterly in the arts which imitate nature, in poetry, painting, statuary, and music. On the other side, where the heart is very bad, the genius and taste, if there happen to be any pretensions to them, will be found shockingand unnatural. NERO would be nothing less than a poet; but hisverses were what one may call most _villainously_ bad. His tasteof magnificence and luxury was horribly glaring, extravagant andunnatural to the last degree. CALIGULA's taste was so outragiously wrong, that he detested the worksof the sweet MANTUAN poet more passionately than ever MOECENAS admiredthem; and if VIRGIL had unfortunately lived down to those times inwhich that monster appeared, he would probably have been torturedto death for no other crime but that he wrote naturally, and like anhonest man. True genius may be said to consist of a perfect polish of soul, whichreceives and reflects the images that fall upon it, without warpingor distortion. And this fine polish of soul is, I believe, constantlyattended with what philosophers call the moral truth. There are minds which receive objects truly, and feel the impressionsthey ought naturally to make, in a very lively manner, but want thefaculty of reflecting them; as there are people who, I suppose, feelall the charms of poetry without being poets themselves. OF TASTE. Our notion of taste may be easily understood by what has been saidupon the subject of genius; for mere good taste is nothing else butgenius without the power of execution. It must be born; and is to be improved chiefly by being accustomed, and the earlier the better, to the most exquisite objects of taste inits various kinds. For the taste in writing and painting, and in everything else, is insensibly formed upon what we are accustomed to; aswell as taste in eating and drinking. One who from his youth has beenused to drink nothing but heavy dismal port, will not immediatelyacquire a relish for claret or burgundy. In the most stupid ages there is more good taste than one would atfirst sight imagine. Even the present, abuse it with what contemptuousepithets you please, cannot be totally void of it. As long as thereare noble humane and generous dispositions amongst mankind, there mustbe good taste. For in general, I do not say always, the taste will bein proportion to those moral qualities and that sensibility of mindfrom which they take their rise. And while many, amongst the great andthe learned, are allowed to have taste for no better reason than thatit is their own opinion, it is often possessed by those who are notconscious of it, and dream as little of pretending to it as to a starand garter. An honest farmer, or shepherd, who is acquainted with nolanguage but what is spoken in his own county, may have a much truerrelish of the _English_ writers than the most dogmatical pedant thatever erected himself into a commentator, and from his _Gothic_ chair, with an ill-bred arrogance, dictated false criticism to the gapingmultitude. But even those who are endued with good natural taste, often judgeimplicitly and by rote, without ever consulting their own taste. Instances of this passive indolence, or rather this unconsciousness ofone's own faculties, appear every day; not only in the fine arts, butin cases where the mere _taste_, according to the original meaningof the word, is alone concerned. For I am positive there are manythousands who, if they were to bring their own palate to a severeexamination, would discover that they really find a more deliciousflavour in mutton than in venison, in flounder than in turbut, and yetprefer middling or bad venison to the best mutton; that is, what isscarcest and dearest, and consequently what is, from the folly ofmankind, the most in vogue, to what is really the most agreeable totheir own private taste. In matter of taste, the public, for the most part, suffers itself tobe led by a few who perhaps are really no judges; but who, under thefavour of some advantages of title, place, or fortune, set up forjudges, and are implicitly followed even by those who have taste. These washy dictators have learnt at school to admire such authors ashave for ages been possessed of an indisputed renown: but they wouldnever have been the first to have discovered strokes of true genius ina co-temporary writer, though they had lived at the court of AUGUSTUSor of Q. ELIZABETH. So undistinguishing is our taste, that if the most torpid dunce thisfruitful age can boast of, could by some artful imposture prepossessthe public, that the most insipid of all his own bread-saucecompositions, to be published next winter, was a piece MILTON's, orany other celebrated author, recovered from dust and obscurity, itwould be received with universal applause; and perhaps be translatedinto _French_ before the town had doated six weeks upon it. One mightventure to say too, that if a work of true spirit and genius was tobe introduced into the world, under the name of some writer of lowreputation, it would be rejected even by the greatest part of thosewho pretend to lead the taste. And no wonder, while an eminent vintnerhas mistaken his own old hock at nine shillings the bottle for that atfive. OF WRITING TO THE TASTE OF THE AGE. Whatever some have pretended, one may reasonably enough doubt whetherever an author wrote much below himself from any cause but thenecessity of writing too fast. When this happens to a writer who, with the advantages of leisure and easy circumstances, is capable ofproducing such works as might charm succeeding ages, it is a disgraceto the nation and the times wherein such a genius had the misfortuneto appear. It belongs to true genius to indulge its own humour; to give a looseto its own sallies; and to be curbed, restrained and directed by thatsound judgment alone which necessarily attends it. It belongs to itto improve and correct the public taste; not to humour or meanlyprostitute itself to the gross or low taste which it finds. Andyou may depend upon it, that whatever author labours to accommodatehimself to the taste of his age--suppose it, if you please, thispresent age--the sickly wane, the impotent decline of the eighteenthcentury: which from a hopeful boy became a most insignificant man;and for any thing that appears at present will die a very fat drowsyblock-head, and be damned to eternal infamy and contempt: every suchauthor I say, though he may thrive as far as an author can in thepresent age, will by degrees languish into obscurity in the next. For though naked and bare-faced vanity; though an active exertion oflittle arts, and the most unremitting perseverance in them; thoughparty, cabal, and intrigue; though accidental advantages, and evenwhimsical circumstances; may conspire to make a very moderate geniusthe idol of the implicit multitude: works that lean upon such fickleprops, that stand upon such a false foundation, will not be long ableto support themselves against the injuries of time. Such buildingsbegin to totter almost as soon as their scaffolding is struck. But if you find it necessary to comply with the humour of your age;the writing best calculated to please a false taste is what hassomething of the air of good writing, without being really so. Forto the vulgar eye the specious is more striking than the genuine. Thebest writing is apt to be too plain, too simple, too unaffected, andtoo delicate to stir the callous organs of the generality of critics, who see nothing but the tawdry glare of tinsel; and are deaf to everything but what is shockingly noisy to a true ear. They are struckwith the fierce glaring colours of old _Frank_; with attitudes andexpressions violent, distorted, and unnatural: while the true, justand easy, the graceful, the moving, the sublime representations of_Raphael_ have not the least power to attract them. The bullying, noisy march in _Judas Macchabeus_ has perhaps more sincere admirersthan that most pathetic one in _Saul_: and in conversation pertnessand mere vivacity is more felt by the general run of company than easyunaffected wit; as flashy, bouncing, flatulent cyder boasts of morespirit than the still vigour of reserved _Madeira_. But the easiest, as well as the most effectual way of writing to thebad taste of your age, is to set out while your genius is yet upon alevel with it. Accordingly, if you have a son who begins to displaya hopeful bloom of imagination, be sure to publish, with all theadvantages that can be procured, the very first essays of his genius. They will hardly be too good to please; and besides, they have achance to be received with particular favour and admiration as theproductions of a young muse. When he has thus taken possession of thepublic ear, he may venture, as his genius ripens, to do his best; hemay write as well as he can, perhaps without much danger of sinking inreputation. The renown of his first crude essays will be sufficientto prejudice the mobility, great and small, in favour of the mostexquisite pieces he can produce afterwards. But if he must live by hiswit, the best thing you can do for him is to transplant him, asearly as possible, to PARIS; where in the worst of days, in the most_Gothic_ muse-detesting age, there is still some shelter afforded tothe most delicate as well as the most uncommon flower that blossomsin the human mind. In that gay serene and genial climate the musesare still more or less cultivated, though not with the same ardour andpassion in every age; as appears from the following passage translatedfrom a[A] _French_ author, who wrote about the beginning of thepresent century. "Almost all the arts have in their turns experiencedthat disgust and love of change which is natural to mankind. But Idon't know that any one of them has felt it more than Poetry; whichin some ages has been exalted to a triumphal heighth, in othersneglected, discouraged and despised. About sixty years ago, underthe administration of one of the greatest geniuses that ever _France_produced, poetry found itself amongst us at its highest pitch ofglory. Those who cultivated the muses were regarded with particularfavour: this art was the road to fortune and dignified stations. Butin these days this ardour seems to be considerably abated. We do notappear to be extremely sensible to poetical merit, &c. " [Footnote A: Defense de la Poesie; par M. L'Abbé _Messieu. Memoíres deLiterature, Tome_ 2de. ] THE TASTE OF THE PRESENT AGE. Amongst many other distinguishing marks of a stupid age, a bad crop ofmen, I have been told that the taste in writing was never so falseas at present. If it is really so, it may perhaps be owing to aprodigious swarm of insipid trashy writers: amongst whom there aresome who pretend to dictate to the public as critics, though theyhardly ever fail to be mistaken. But their dogmatic impudence, andsomething like a scientific air of talking the most palpablenonsense, imposes upon great numbers of people, who really possess aconsiderable share of natural Taste; of which at the same time theyare so little conscious as to suffer themselves passively to be misledby those blundering guides. A Taste worth cultivating is to be improved and preserved by reading_only_ the best writers. But whoever, after perusing a satire ofHorace, even in the dullest English translation, can relish thestupid abuse of a blackguard rhymster, may as well indulge the naturaldepravity of his Taste, and riot for life upon distiller's grains. But the Taste in writing is not, cannot be worse, than it is in music, as well as in all theatrical entertainments. In architecture indeedthere are some elegant and magnificent works arising, at a very propertime to restore the nation to some credit with its neighbours in thisarticle; after its having been exposed to such repeated disgraces bya triumvirate of awkward clumsey piles, that are not ashamed to shewtheir stupid heads in the neighbourhood of Whitehall: and one more, that ought to be demolished; if it was for no other reason but torestore the view of an elegant church, which has now for many yearsbeen buried alive behind the Mansion-house. It is indeed some comfort, that while Taste and Genius happen to bevery false and impotent in most of the fine arts, they are not so inall. The arts of Gardening particularly, and the elegant plan ofa farm, have of late years displayed themselves in a few spots togreater advantage in England, than perhaps ever before in any partof Europe. This is indeed very far from being universal; and somegardens, admired and celebrated still, are so smoothly regular, soover-planted, and so crowded with affected, impertinent, ridiculousornaments of temples, ruins, pyramids, obelisks, statues, and athousand other contemptible whims, that a continuation of the sameground in its rude natural state, is infinitely more delightful. Youmust often have seen fine situations ruined with costly pretences to_improvement_. The most noble and romantic situation of any gardensI have seen, is near Chepstow; and the gentleman who possessesthat delightful spot, has shewn great judgment and a true taste, inmeddling so little with Nature where she wanted so little help. This is one happy instance of an admirable situation, where Natureis modestly and judiciously improved, not hurt, by art. An oppositeinstance of what art, skill, and taste may produce, without anyparticular advantages of ground or situation, is most agreeablydisplayed in the royal gardens at Kew. There you find an extent offlat ground, so easily, agreeably, and unaffectedly broken, thatyou would think it impossible to alter it but to the worse. Topass without any notice the agreeable and the elegant pieces ofarchitecture, which without crowding adorn those delightful gardens;perhaps there is not a physick garden in Europe where any botanist canbe more agreeably entertained, as to the variety of curious plants. But there is something new as far as I know, and particularlyingenious here in the disposition and management of them. Those thatnaturally delight in the rocks, and the dry hungry soil, are hereplanted upon ridges of artificial rock-work; where they shew allthe luxuriance of vegetation that they could amongst the Alps, thePyrenees or the Andes. While a very different tribe, the Aquatics, display themselves in a large cistern, where they are constantlysupplied with their best and most natural nourishment the rain water, conveyed to them from the eves of the richest greenhouse I have everseen. William Andrews Clark Memorial Library: University of California THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY _General Editors_ H. RICHARD ARCHER William Andrews Clark Memorial Library R. C. BOYS University of Michigan E. N. HOOKER University of California, Los Angeles JOHN LOFTIS University of California, Los Angeles The society exists to make available inexpensive reprints (usuallyfacsimile reproductions) of rare seventeenth and eighteenth centuryworks. The editorial policy of the Society continues unchanged. As in thepast, the editors welcome suggestions concerning publications. All correspondence concerning subscriptions in the United Statesand Canada should be addressed to the William Andrews ClarkMemorial Library, 2205 West Adams Blvd. , Los Angeles 18, California. Correspondence concerning editorial matters may be addressed to any ofthe general editors. Membership fee continues $2. 50 per year. Britishand European subscribers should address B. H. Blackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England. Publications for the fifth year [1950-1951] (_At least six items, most of them from the following list, will bereprinted_. ) FRANCES REYNOLDS (?): _An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Taste, and of the Origin of Our Ideas of Beauty, &c. _ (1785). Introduction byJames L. Clifford. THOMAS BAKER: _The Fine lady's Airs_ (1709). Introduction by JohnHarrington Smith. DANIEL DEFOE: _Vindication of the Press_ (1718). Introduction by OthoClinton Williams. JOHN EVELYN: _An Apologie for the Royal Party_ (1659); _A Panegyric toCharles the Second_ (1661). Introduction by Geoffrey Keynes. CHARLES MACKLIN: _Man of the World_ (1781). Introduction by DougaldMacMillan. _Prefaces to Fiction_. Selected and with an Introduction by BenjaminBoyce. THOMAS SPRAT: _Poems_. SIR WILLIAM PETTY: _The Advice of W. P. To Mr. Samuel Hartlib for theAdvancement of some particular Parts of Learning_ (1648). THOMAS GRAY: _An Elegy Wrote in a Country Church Yard_ (1751). (Facsimile of first edition and of portions of Gray's manuscripts ofthe poem). * * * * * To the Augustan Reprint Society _Subscriber's Name and Address:_ _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library 2205 West Adams Boulevard Los Angeles 18, California_ _As_ MEMBERSHIP FEE _I enclose for the years marked:_ The current year $ 2. 50 The current & the 4th year 5. 00 The current, 3rd, & 4th year 7. 50 The current, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th year 10. 00 The current, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th year 11. 50 (_Publications no. 3 & 4 are out of print_) Make check or money order payable to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIA. NOTE: _All income of the Society is devoted to defraying cost ofprinting and mailing_. PUBLICATIONS First Year (1946-1947) 1. Richard Blackmore's _Essay upon Wit_ (1716), and Addison's_Freeholder_ No. 45 (1716). 2. Samuel Cobb's _Of Poetry_ and _Discourse on Criticism_ (1707). 3. _Letter to A. H. Esq. ; concerning the Stage_ (1698), and RichardWillis' _Occasional Paper No. IX_ (1698). (OUT OF PRINT) 4. _Essay on Wit_ (1748), together with Characters by Flecknoe, andJoseph Warton's _Adventurer_ Nos. 127 and 133. (OUT OF PRINT) 5. Samuel Wesley's _Epistle to a Friend Concerning Poetry_ (1700) and_Essay on Heroic Poetry_ (1693). 6. _Representation of the Impiety and Immorality of the Stage_(1704)and _Some Thoughts Concerning the Stage_ (1704). Second Year (1947-1948) 7. John Gay's _The Present State of Wit_ (1711); and a section on Witfrom _The English Theophrastus_ (1702). 8. Rapin's _De Carmine Pastorali_, translated by Creech (1684). 9. T. Hanmer's (?) _Some Remarks on the Tragedy of Hamlet_ (1736). 10. Corbyn Morris _Essay towards Fixing the True Standards of Wit, etc_. (1744). 11. Thomas Purney's _Discourse on the Pastoral_ (1717). 12. Essays on the Stage, selected, with an Introduction by Joseph WoodKrutch. Third Year (1948-1949) 13. Sir John Falstaff (pseud. ), _The Theatre_ (1720). 14. Edward Moore's _The Gamester_ (1753). 15. John Oldmixon's _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter to Harley_(1712); and Arthur Mainwaring's _The British Academy_ (1712). 16. Nevil Payne's _Fatal Jealousy_ (1673). 17. Nicholas Rowe's _Some Account of the Life of Mr. WilliamShakespear_ (1709). 18. Aaron Hill's Preface to _The Creation_; and Thomas Brereton'sPreface to _Esther_. Fourth Year (1949-1950) 19. Susanna Centlivre's _The Busie Body_ (1709). 20. Lewis Theobald's _Preface to The Works of Shakespeare_ (1734). 21. _Critical Remarks on Sir Charles Gradison, Clarissa, and Pamela_(1754). 22. Samuel Johnson's _The Vanity of Human Wishes_ (1749) and Two_Rambler_ papers (1750). 23. John Dryden's _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ (1681). 24. Pierre Nicole's _An Essay on True and Apparent Beauty in Whichfrom Settled Principles is Rendered the Grounds for Choosing andRejecting Epigrams_, translated by J. V. Cunningham.