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
I do not know whether the length of the average _causerie_ was directly
conditioned by the fact of its appearance in a daily newspaper[598]
instead of a Review, or whether Sainte-Beuve’s experience and instinct
combined, induced him to make it rather shorter, but much more uniform
in length, than his _Deux Mondes_ articles. This length is pretty
exactly twenty pages—a few articles being a little longer and a few a
little shorter, but the greater number coming very close to the score
of, say, 350 words each. It may be a superstition based on this great
practitioner’s practice, but I think the majority of his successors have
found that this length—say, from six to eight thousand words—is
singularly normal for the treatment of an average subject of the larger
literary kind. It ought not to weary the reader; it does not cramp the
writer; and it does not tempt him to undue expatiation. Occasionally
Sainte-Beuve, of course, doubled or trebled or even further multiplied
_causeries_ where the subject demanded it; but at first he did this very
seldom, and he never made it the rule. In selecting his subjects he
naturally preferred a new book when he could get it, if only as a “peg”:
and he had plenty of choice. His rejections, however, were sometimes
disappointing, particularly so in the case of M. Egger’s _History of
Greek Criticism_, which he had intended to take. He neither specially
chose nor specially rejected themes that he had already treated: and
sometimes, though not often, he reproduced parts of his old work. As to
the treatment, enough has been said of that above, or will be said
below. It was almost unique: it is still almost unmatched. As far as any
general scheme is extricable, it is the obvious one of a few general
remarks—not very seldom expanding into precious tractatules—of more or
less abstract criticism; a biographical sketch, anecdoted with special
view to literary influences; remarks, with more or less quotation, on
books and passages; and sometimes a sketch, usually rather shy and
suggestive than peremptory, of comparative “placing”—the comparison,
however, having been subtly presented throughout. But the method is
never stereotyped: and the variations are of the essence.
[Sidenote: _Bricks of the house._]
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