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
incurring a considerable responsibility. The descendant of Propertius,
on whom Javolenus Priscus made that surpassing joke, recurs in ix. 22
with fresh praise; and the last literary letter of importance (the 26th
of the same) is on what may be called the grand style in oratory.
Here, as elsewhere, there may no doubt be room for difference of opinion
as to the space and importance allowed to our witnesses. From the point
of view of this book, however, Pliny’s testimony is of the utmost
importance. We may regret—I certainly do—that an equal abundance of
documents of the same character has not come to us from some one of
greater literary competence—from Aristotle, or even from Dionysius, from
Longinus, or even from Quintilian. But this is distinctly a case where
the better is enemy to the good. For the purpose of ascertaining what
was the actual state of critical opinion and literary taste at a given
time, it is of more value to possess such a collection as this of
Pliny’s than to have fifty _Arts of Poetry_.
Let us “write off” liberally at the outset for the drawbacks of the
document. Pliny’s Letters, pleasant as they are, are not free from a
suspicion, and, considering some statements of their own, something more
than a suspicion, of being not entirely spontaneous: they were, at any
rate in some cases, evidently written for publication. The author
himself, though a man of excellent learning, of the completest
cultivation of his day, of wide and ardent literary interests, and of no
little common-sense, was, as some of his quoted judgments will have
shown, not quite sufficiently possessed of the finest or most
discriminating literary judgment. Moreover, he had a somewhat omnivorous
and disproportionate opinion of the value of literary work, merely as
such, even merely as something that looked such—compilation,
translation, copying verse and prose, what not. Further, in these
characteristics he to a great extent reflected those of his time—a time
of great and active attention to literature, but rather one of talent
than of genius, a period of decadence in many respects, and hardly of
resurrection in any, and lastly, a period of doubtful literary taste,
inclining, when it was sincere, to the florid and Asiatic, when it
affected superiority, to a forced Pseudo-Atticism and concinnity.
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