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
It is, however, only fair to say that neither Breitinger nor Bodmer
fails in that critical examination of actual literature which, as it has
been one of the objects of this book to show, is the most fruitful way
of the critic. Bodmer’s study of _Paradise Lost_, which he translated,
nay, even that of Opitz, who was edited by the pair, provided perhaps
the most important element in his critical education. And whatever gaps
there may have been in their literary accomplishment, they knew and used
the greatest critics of antiquity. If they did not know or use all its
greatest poets, they used what they did know freshly and independently.
They knew French and Italian literature fairly, and Breitinger at least
had studied the Ancient and Modern Quarrel. They knew something of
English besides Milton, though little or nothing of “Sasper,” and their
earnest and affectionate study of German literature itself, reaching
by-and-by to the treasures of the “Middle High” period, is, to me at
least, one of their greatest titles to credit. They may have pushed the
picture-poetry notion too far—Lessing was at the door with a veritable
“two-handed engine” to cut off any superfluity here. But in their time,
and in all times, it could but do more good than harm.
[Sidenote: _Bodmer’s verse criticism._]
With the commentatorial side of their activity may be connected the four
verse pieces edited with much care by Herr Baechtold in the _Deutsche
Literatur-Denkmale_.[35] The two last of these, dating from the author’s
latest years, when he felt himself among those that knew not Joseph—
_Untergang der Beruhmten Namen_, and _Bodmer nicht verkannt_—are in
hexameters, and are only pathetic curiosities. The first, _Character der
Teutschen Gedichte_, 1734, with an appendix, _Versuch einer Kritik über
die Deutschen Dichter_, and a second but more independent sequel, _Die
Drollingerische Muse_ (Drollinger was a poet and friend of Bodmer’s who
had just died), have more substantive interest.[36] They are in
Alexandrines, duly arranged with masculine and feminine alternation, and
contain not a little mostly sound criticism of mostly much-forgotten
bards.
[Sidenote: _Their later work in mediæval poetry, and their general
position._]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account