A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 3 (of 3), Modern criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 3 (of 3), Modern criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
In this phase of his genius, however, there is perhaps, for some tastes
at any rate, a little too much of what has been called _bravura_—too
much of the merely epideictic. It is not so in the other. Appreciate the
appreciation of the _Winter’s Tale_ passage; still more take to heart
(they will go to it without much taking where there is one) the “First
Acquaintance with Poets,” or still better the marvellous critical
swan-song of the “Farewell,” and there can be no more doubt about
Hazlitt. _Quia multum amavit_ is at once his best description and his
greatest glory. In all the range of criticism which I have read I can
hardly think of any one except Longinus who displays the same faculty of
not unreasonable or unreasoned passion for literature; and Longinus,
alas! has, as an opportunity for showing this to us, scarcely more than
the bulk of one of Hazlitt’s longest Essays, of which, long and short,
Hazlitt himself has given us, I suppose, a hundred. Nor, as in some
others (many, if not most of whom, if I named them, I should name for
the sake of honour), is a genuine passion made the mere theme of
elaborate and deliberate literary variations. As we have seen, Hazlitt
will often leave it expressed in one sentence of ejaculatory and
convincing fervour; it seldom appears at greater length than that of a
passage, while a whole lecture or essay in the key of rapture is
exceedingly rare. Hazlitt is desultory, irrelevant, splenetic, moody,
self-contradictory; but he is never merely pleonastic,—there is no mere
verbiage, no mere virtuosity, in him.
And the consequence is that this enthusiastic appreciation of letters,
which I have, however heretically, taken throughout this book to be
really the highest function of criticism, _catches_: that the critical
yeast (to plagiarise from ourselves) never fails to work. The order of
history, as always, should probably be repeated, and the influence of
Coleridge should be felt, as Hazlitt himself felt it, first: it is well
to fortify also with Longinus himself, and with Aristotle, and with as
many others of the great ones as the student can manage to master. But
there is at least a danger, with some perhaps of not the worst minds, of
all this remaining cold as the bonfire before the torch is applied. The
_silex scintillans_ of Hazlitt’s rugged heart will seldom fail to give
the vivifying spark from its own inward and immortal fire.[518]
[Sidenote: _Blake._]
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