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
Mr Spingarn (p. 94) apparently states that he “formulated” them, but
the gist of the next two pages fully corrects this slip or ambiguity;
and he has himself pointed out with equal decision and correctness
that the French assumption contained in the phrase, _Unités
Scaligériennes_, is unfounded.
Footnote 106:
P. 365.
-----
We may venture indeed to suspect that Scaliger “had more wit than to be
here.” One may frequently differ with him; but he seldom runs mad on
mere theory. It is he, for instance, who, while, as we have seen, he
lays down uncompromisingly that the material of poetry is verse,
instances the _Æthiopica_ as a perfect epic. Instead of confusing poetry
and learning, as some have done, he holds the much more sensible
position that learning is useful to a poet. He takes the hard-and-fast
ethical view of the ends both of tragedy and of all poetry, and he
believes firmly in the type. But he does not bemuse himself, as some had
done and more were to do, in the explanation of _katharsis_, and the
definition of the tragic hero.
His greatest and also his most pervading critical fault is that
“deification of Virgil,” whereof, though by no means the inventor, he
was the chief prophet to the best part of three centuries. [Sidenote:
_His Virgil-worship._] Let it be admitted (with every possible emphasis
on the fact that it is no mere extorted admission but a genuine and
spontaneous opinion) that anybody is free to admire Virgil or any one
else as much as he likes. “She that is fair to him” _is_ so, and there’s
an end on’t. But if any one proceed, not merely to intimate indifference
to other fair ones, but to find positive fault with them because they
are not like her, then he becomes at once uncritical: still more so if
he erect her qualities, features, style, into abstract virtues and
positive truths, all opposites to which are sin and vileness. He may
call “Simula Silene, nervosa et lignea Dorcas,” to take two only out of
the famous list in the classic place of this matter. But he must not
declare that a girl who has a straight Grecian nose is therefore ugly,
or that softness and plumpness are not excellent things in woman.
Scaliger does this. For him Virgil is, at once, the standard of
excellence and the infallible touchstone of defect. Nay, he is actually
a better Nature; a wiser but more perfect Creation, whereby you may save
yourself the trouble of outside imitation, inasmuch as everything worth
imitating is there better done than by Nature herself. It is impossible
to exaggerate or caricature Scaliger’s Maronolatry: as the Highfliers
did in the case of Defoe’s _Shortest Way_, he would cheerfully accept
and indorse the most outrageous statement of it.
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