Graham's Magazine, Vol. XX, No. 3, March 1842Various
General
Graham's Magazine, Vol. XX, No. 3, March 1842
Various
Literature -- Periodicals; Literature, Modern -- 19th century -- Periodicals
The present volumes, however, are not the less valuable on this account.
They contain many of the most noted and some of the best compositions of
the author. Among other articles of interest we have the celebrated
“Discourse on the Objects, Pleasures and Advantages of Science”—a
title, by the way, in which the word “pleasures” is one of the purest
supererogation. That this discourse is well written, we, of course,
admit, since we do not wish to be denounced as blockheads; but we beg
leave to disagree, most positively, with the Preface, which asserts that
“there was only one individual living by whom it could have been
produced.” This round asseveration will only excite a smile upon the
lips of every man of the slightest pretension to scientific acquirement.
We are personally acquainted with at least a dozen individuals who could
have written this treatise _as well_ as the Lord Chancellor has written
it. In fact, a discourse of this character is by no means difficult of
composition—a discourse such as Lord Brougham has given us. His whole
design consists in an unmethodical collection of the most _striking_ and
at the same time the most _popularly comprehensible facts_ in general
science. And it cannot be denied that this plan of demonstrating the
advantages of science as a whole _by detailing insulated specimens of
its interest_ is a most unphilosophical and inartistical mode of
procedure—a mode which even puts one in mind of the σκολαστικος
offering a brick as a sample of the house he wished to sell. Neither is
the essay free (as should be imperatively demanded in a case of this
nature) from very gross error and mis-statement. Its style, too, in its
minor points, is unusually bad. The strangest grammatical errors abound,
of which the initial pages are especially full, and the whole is
singularly deficient in that precision which should characterise a
scientific discourse. In short, it is an entertaining essay, but in some
degree superficial and quackish, and could have been _better_ written by
any one of a multitude of living _savans_.
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