Harrington: A Story of True LoveO'Connor, William Douglas
General
Harrington: A Story of True Love
O'Connor, William Douglas
Slavery -- United States -- Fiction
“Now, look here, Richard,” he replied. “In the first place, I flatly
deny that there is contempt for any sort of people, common or uncommon,
in the Shakspearean pages. But let that pass, for what I am going
to say will cover it fully. I want to call your attention to the
distinctive peculiarity—the uniqueness—of the Shakspearean creations.
In the Shakspearean mind you have an unexampled union of the subtlest
observation and the profoundest reason. This author observed far more
closely than even Thackeray, and philosophized far more greatly than even
Plato. But this is not all. He constructed a series of works which show
the principles of human action as they lie in the nature of man, and
all the complex operation of the human passions. And more, he created a
number of figures, which are not characters, but types. That is the grand
distinctive Shakspearean peculiarity. Nobody has done that but he. The
Don Quixote of Cervantes is a great figure, but it is not Shakspearean.
The Greek Prometheus, the German Mephistopheles are immense allegorical
creations, but they are not Shakspearean. He alone has made figures which
are types—representative men and women standing for classes. In a word,
he alone has given us in a series of models or images, the Science of
Human Nature. This it is that makes him solitary, as the power with which
it is done makes him supreme, in literature.”
“I understand,” said Wentworth, “and I agree; but I don’t see what you’re
driving at, mine ancient.”
“Wait a minute, and you shall see,” returned Harrington. “Bacon wanted
this very thing done. Nothing that you can do for the elevation of the
world, he says substantially, is of any value, unless this is done. The
radical defect in all science is, he says, that it has not been done, and
he rates Aristotle sharply for not doing it. He wants a work which will
give us the Science of Man, as he is, in order that we may make him what
he ought to be—a work, he says, which is to contain the descriptions of
the several characters and tempers of men’s natures and dispositions to
the end that the precepts concerning the culture and cure of the mind
may be concluded upon—a work which is also to contain examples in moral
and civil life. This is what Bacon wanted done, and the author of the
Shakspeare Drama did it. Bacon’s requirement is fulfilled exactly in the
Shakspeare Drama. Even our critics have got hold of the idea that the
Science of Human Nature which Bacon wanted is in the Shakspeare Drama,
and the purpose which Bacon intended such a work to accomplish, is in
daily process of accomplishment through the agency of those plays. And
what is more, Bacon wanted that work to be in the form of poetry—the
Georgics of the Mind, he calls it, with a reminiscence of Virgil. The
poets, he says elsewhere, are the best doctors of this knowledge;
and again, for the expression of such a purpose, reason is not so
perspicuous, nor examples so apt, as the dramatic or poetic presentation.
Very good.
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