A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
Elsewhere it gleams more faintly; though it would be as ungrateful as it
would be Philistine to ignore the debt which we owe to others, from
Aristotle himself downwards. It is characteristic of Greek criticism—and
it is the secret of its weakness as well as of its strength—that it is
more busy with kinds than with authors, with authors than with books.
And when it is busy with authors at all, it is hardly ever busy with
them as wholes, as phenomena occupying an individual place in the
literary cosmos; but almost always as examples of this or that quality,
as supplying illustrations of this or that Figure, as giving a good
pattern for such-and-such a progymnasma, a model for dealing with
such-and-such a stasis. Proceeding in this way, criticism attempts—and
fails—to be scientific; it renounces its right to be artistic, and
effects the renunciation. The individual _ethos_ of the poet, the more
solid but not less individual _ethos_ of the proseman, flies off and
melts away, when each is merely regarded as an example of “_todetes_” or
“_tallotes_” as a lecturer’s cabinet, in which you put your hand to draw
out an illustration of Anadiplosis or Palillogia. Almost may the most
idealist of metaphysical students think of turning to sheer Hobbism, of
blaspheming “_nesses_ and _tudes_ and _ties_,” when he sees them dragged
in and abused after this fatal fashion, which even Aristotle does not
wholly escape, and in which others indulge as if it were their sole and
legitimate business.
It follows that, except for the stock contrast of Herodotus and
Thucydides, in respect of the Orators (the exception being there due to
an obvious reason), and to a less extent of the Three Tragedians, we
have very few studies at once comprehensive and comparative of authors
in Greek, and that, out of Longinus, such studies as we have are
scrappy, technical, and altogether lacking in that critical συνάρπασμα
which the great _locus_ of Simylus requires. There is really no second
passage in Greek which can be put alongside of the Longinian estimate of
the _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_, agree or disagree as we may with the
details of this.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account