« PreviousContinue »
# *# Senh them much more than Virgil. I
#tattilain the several dialects which Homer
of for this end. Milton, in conformity
hans infused a great many Latinisms, as
***** Art of the ancient poets, and with Ari
Coment, and sometimes IIebraisms, into PL-7 of his poem; as towards the beginning #2
di they not perceive the evil plight
who shall tempt with wand'ring feet
'I was bork untusttom'd infinite abyss,
we with indefatigable wings
spread his airy Night
1111 the vast abrupt!
So both ascend
Lier this head inav be reckoned the placing the we live alter the substantive, the transposition of world, the turning the adjective into a substantive, will sveral other foreign modes of speech which this Jump tas naturalized to give his verse the greater und, and throw it out of prose.
'Thac third method mentioned by Aristotle is what agrees with the genius of the Greek language more than with that of any other tongue, and is therefore more used by Ilomer than by any
other the lengthening of a phrase by the addition of words, which inay either be inserted or omitted, the insertion or omission of certain syllables. · Milton contracting of particular words by
poet. I mean
the extending or
as also by
has put in practice this method of raising his language, as far as the nature of our tongue will permit, as in the passage above mentioned, eremite, for what is hermit in common discourse. If you observe the measure of his verse, he has with great judgınent suppressed a syllable in several words, and shortened those of two syllables into one; by which method, besides the abovementioned advantage, he has given a greater variety to his numbers. But this practice is more particularly remarkable in the names of
persons and of countries, as Beelzebub, Ilessebon, and in many other particulars, wherein he has either changed the name, or made 130 of that which is not the most commonly known, that he might the better deviate from the language of the vulgar.
The same reason recommended to him several old words; which also makes his poem appear the more yencrable, and gives it a greater air of antiquity.
I must likewise take notice, that there are in Milton several words of his own coining, as cerbercan, miscreated, hell-doom'd, embryon atoms, and many others. If the reader is offended at this liberty in our English poet, I would recommend hiin to a dis.. course in Plutarch, which shows us how frequently Homer has made use of the same liberty.
Milton, by the abovementioned helps, and by the choice of the noblest words and phrases which our tongue would afford him, has carried our language to a greater height than any of the English poets have · ever done before or after him, and made the sublimity of his style equal to that of his sentiments.
I have been the more particular in these observations on Milton's style, because it is in that part of him in which he appears the most singular. The VOL. III.
remarks I have here made upon the practice of other poets, with my observations out of Aristotle, will perhaps alleviate the prejudice which some have taken to his poem upon this account; though after all, I must confess that I think his style, though admirable in general, is in some places too much stiffened and obscured by the frequent use of those methods which Aristotle has prescribed for the raising of it.
This redundancy of those several ways of speech, which Aristotle calls · foreign language,' and with which Milton has so very much enriched and in some places darkened the language of his poem, was the more proper for his use, because his poem is written in blank verse. Rhyme, without any other assistance, throws the language off from prose, and very often makes an indifferent phrase pass unregarded; but where the verse is not built upon rhymes, there pomp of sound and energy of expression are indispensably necessary to support the style, and keep it from falling into the flatness of prose.
Those who have not a taste for this elevation of style, and are apt to ridicule a poet when he departs from the common forms of expression, would do well to see how Aristotle has treated an ancient author called Euclid, for his insipid mirth upon this occasion. Mr. Dryden used to call these sort of men his prose-critics.
I should, under this head of the language, consider Milton's numbers, in which he has made use of several elisions, which are not customary among other English poets, as may be particularly observed in his cutting off the letter y when it precedes a vowel. This, and some other innovations in the measure of his verse, has varied his numbers in such a manner
as makes them incapable of satiating the ear, and cloying the reader; which the same uniform measure would certainly have done, and which the perpetual returns of rhyme never fail to do in long narrative poems. I shall close these reflections upon the language of Paradise Lost, with observing that Milton has copied after Homer rather than Virgil in the length of his periods, the copiousness of his phrases, and the running of his verses into one another.
CRITIQUE ON MILTON'S PARADISE Lost. No. 291.
I have now considered Milton's Paradise Lost under those four great heads of the fable, the characters, the sentiments, and the language; and have shown that he excels, in general, under each of these heads. I hope that I have made several discoveries which may appear new, even to those who are versed in critical learning. Were I indeed to choose my readers, by whose judgment I would stand or fall, they should not be such as are acquainted only with the French and Italian critics, but also with the ancient and modern who have written in either of the learned languages. Above all, I would have them well versed in the Greek and Latin poets, without which a man very often fancies that he understands a critic, when in reality he does not comprehend his meaning.
It is in criticism as in all other sciences and speculations : one who brings with him any implicit notions and observations, which he has made in his reading of the poets, will find his own reflections methodized and explained, and perhaps several little hints that had
passed in his mind, perfected and improved in the works of a good critic; whereas one who has not these previous lights is very often an utter stranger to what he reads, and apt to put a wrong interpretation upon it.
Nor is it sufficient that a man, who sets up for a judge in criticism, should have perused the authors above mentioned, unless he has also a clear and logical head. Without this talent he is perpetually puzzled and perplexed amidst his own blunders, mistakes the sense of those he would confute, or, if he chances to think right, does not know how to convey his thoughts to another with clcarness and perspicuity. Aristotle, who was the best critic, was also one of the best logicians that ever appeared in the world.
Mr. Locke's Essay on Human Understanding would be thought a very odd book for a man to make himself master of, who would get a reputation by critical writings; though at the same time it is very certain that an author, who has not learned the art of distinguishing between words and things, and of ranging his thoughts and setting them in proper lights, whatever notions he may have, will lose himself in confusion and obscurity. I might further observe that there is not a Greek or Latin critic, who has not shown, even in the style of his criticisms, that he was a master of all the elegance and delicacy of his native tongue.
The truth of it is, there is nothing more absurd than for a man to set up for a critic, without a good insight into all the parts of learning; whereas many of those who have endeavoured to signalize themselves by works of this nature, among our English writers, are not only defective in the abovementioned particulars, but plainly discover, by the phrases which they make use of, and by their confused way of thinking, that they are not ac