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
rule, actually did, what aim they seem to have set before them, what
connection with the best literary criticism they seem to have had.
We need not very greatly disturb ourselves at the fact that, of complete
Rhetorical treatises, we have probably nothing between Aristotle and
Dionysius, if even that attributed to the latter be genuine; and that
modern investigations refuse indorsement to the genuineness of the _De
Interpretatione_ attributed to Demetrius Phalereus,[78] which would, if
it were genuine, be the oldest we have. For, from myriad petty
indications, there is no reasonable reason for believing that a genuine
_Rhetoric_ by Demetrius would be very different from that which is now
attributed to some later Alexandrian writer. Rhetoric, as we have seen,
had from the first been hampered by special attributions and
limitations; nor (as so often happens in history) did these limitations
cease, at any rate to some extent, to work when their causes ceased to
exist. The sentry in St James’s Park, who continued to be posted till
the other day at the garden-door of a certain house, because (as it was
found out long after the reason had been forgotten) some Royal or
Ambassadorial personage had been quartered there for a time generations
earlier, was a great and admirable allegory—and in wiser days than our
own would have remained undisturbed as such. Moreover, though the
political importance of Rhetoric decreased, and the assemblies of Greece
became mere parish councils; though the law courts went more and more
either by fixed codes or personal influence; though philosophy became
_phluaria_; Rhetoric, having once, with unconscious cunning, [Sidenote:
_Rhetoric early stereotyped._] got Education practically into her hands,
retained that powerful engine and all the influence that it confers. It
would seem however that, pretty early, a very mischievous process of
stereotyping took place. Grammar and Logic, the companions of Rhetoric,
were to some extent saved by their having positive things to deal
with—the facts of speech and the Laws of Thought. But Rhetoric dealt
with fashion, opinion, etiquette: and except when, in the hands of
superior persons like Dionysius and Longinus among the Greeks, like
Quintilian among the Latins, it shook itself free and became the
Literary Criticism that it ought to be, it became a rather parlous
thing. It early developed the disease of technical jargon, in that
specially dangerous form—recognisable perhaps in times nearer our own
than those of Demetrius or even of Hermogenes—the form of giving
wantonly new meanings to common words. It elaborated an arbitrary and
baneful system of “common form”—of schemes, and types, and conventional
schedules, into which, by a minimum of intellectual exertion, the orator
or writer could throw what he wanted. On the one hand, it constantly
increased and multiplied the Figures; on the other hand, it invented a
system of things called _staseis_—"states of the case"—which attempted
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