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
Let nothing be denied—or, for the matter of that, affirmed—before
everything has been considered. [Sidenote: _Historical examination of
this._] What are the facts? Boileau came at the end—at the very end—of a
stage of French poetry which had been rather a long one, and
unquestionably one of very chequered and not very highly distinguished
performance. The somewhat hasty theories, and the often splendid, but
nearly always unequal, practice of the _Pléiade_, had given place to a
sort of rococo individualism, to the bastard and easily ignoble kinds of
parody and burlesque, or to corrupt followings of Spanish and Italian
practice. Many charming, and some fine, things (including that stately
passage of Chapelain’s which many classical critics, who scoff at his
name, have admired when all but literally translated in _The Deserted
Village_) had been written; but the writers had constantly dropped from
them to the trivial and the bombastic. But when Boileau began seriously
to write in 1663-64,[378] this period was in its very last stage. It
could not have lasted much, or any, longer if there had been no Boileau
at all. Of his actual victims some were long dead; others were very old
men; the younger were persons of no importance, _ephemera_, whether
critical or poetical, which would have died with the day. The smoky
torch of Théophile—a true poetic torch for all its smoke—had flickered
out nearly forty years before. Cyrano, to whom Boileau gives
contemptuous blessing in part, only that he may ban him and others more
effectively, had slept in peace for eight years. Saint-Amant, who had
real poetic gift, and who, if he was no scholar in the ancient tongues,
knew the modern in a fashion which puts Boileau’s ignorance of their
literatures to shame, had met the end described so feelingly by his
critic some three years earlier. Chapelain was a man of sixty-seven;
Cotin one of sixty. It is by attacking not the dead and decrepit, but
the young and rising, that a man shows himself a great warrior and a
useful citizen in criticism. In fact, the principles of correctness
which Boileau espoused had, as we have seen, been practically taken up
long before, even by poor creatures like the Abbé d’Aubignac, in certain
departments, and Chapelain himself had smitten in this sense before he
felt the wounds.
-----
Footnote 378:
The First and Sixth Satires are a little, and some smaller pieces
much, earlier than this, but they are indecisive and unimportant.
-----
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