A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 2 (of 3), From the Renaissance to the decline of eighteenth century orthodoxySaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 2 (of 3), From the Renaissance to the decline of eighteenth century orthodoxy
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
Not to be confounded with the critic and versifier, René Rapin, who
was not born till after Regnier’s death, and whom to call “favourite,
&c.,” would indeed have been a dreadful thing to do; still less with
the historian Rapin de Thoyras, who was a generation later again. This
Rapin was Nicolas, part author of the glorious _Satire Menippée_,
victor in the burlesque contest of the Flea (see Southey’s _Doctor_),
a good versifier in Latin, and no ill one in French, though he was of
the (in France not very numerous) partisans of classical metres. He
died in 1608, not long after the date of this satire.
Footnote 303:
I read my Regnier in two editions, both very desirable as books, and
of different merits otherwise. The one, that of Prosper Poitevin
(Paris, 1860), is very compact; and, besides other matter, has the old
commentary of Brossette, which is extremely interesting as expressing
the views of a disciple of Boileau on a poet whom, to do him justice,
Boileau could not but admire, though he characteristically belittled
him. The other, that of E. Courbet (Paris, 1875), has a text adjusted
in the scrupulous modern manner, and some important additions to the
biography.
-----
If we have given Malherbe the credit of being the first modern critic to
play the awful Aristarch with a contemporary in the true and full
Aristarchian manner, Regnier must deserve that of being the first poet
of genius in modern times to undertake a real _chevauchée_ in the
interests of the true criticism against the false. [Sidenote: _His_
Ninth Satire.] The Satire is not faultless; there is some divagation,
and an attempt (giving some countenance to the deplorable excesses, in
the opposite direction of insulting poverty, which Boileau and Pope
permit themselves) to set the profits and prosperity of Desportes
against the comparative neediness of Malherbe. But this neediness was
only comparative; and Regnier has the good taste never to name his
adversary, and to let the arrows find their mark without vulgar personal
abuse. The spirit of the piece is delightful; its straight hitting never
baulks the game; and the verse is often of the very first quality.
Read—I only wish I had room to quote—the passage, which only Juvenal and
Dryden have equalled, on Malherbe’s contempt alike of the Greeks and the
Pléiade (20-27); that on his elevation of the mere vernacular, as the
test of language, which follows; the denunciation of his arrogant
assumption of knowledge as being his own peculiar, which follows that;
and the famous diatribe of forty verses long, and with every other verse
a triumph, which scoffs at the anxiety—
“Prendre garde qu’un _qui_ ne heurte une diphtongue,”
which labels the whole proceeding—
“C’est proser de la rime et rimer de la prose;”
compares it to the tricks of rouging and dressing up in women, and
contrasts the natural beauties of poetry with all this powder and
pomatum.
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