Lives of the most eminent literary and scientific men of France, Vol. 1 (of 2)Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft
Science
Lives of the most eminent literary and scientific men of France, Vol. 1 (of 2)
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft
Authors, French -- Biography
So much renown of course inspired his would be rivals with rancour; they
tried to detract from the merit of the successful play, and to show that
at least it _ought_ not to have succeeded. Scuderi published a bitter
and elaborate attack, remarkable chiefly for the entire ignorance it
displays of all the real springs of human passion and human interest. He
calls Chimene a monster, and speaks of "the odious struggle of love
and honour." He appealed to the French academy to decide on the justice
of his criticism. The academy, not long before instituted by the
cardinal de Richelieu, penetrated the minister's annoyance at
Corneille's success, and his wish to have a rival crushed; so they by no
means liked to come forward in defence of the poet; nor, on the other
hand, did they relish the invidious task of pronouncing against him;
they signified, therefore, that they should remain silent, unless
invited by the author himself to decide on his merits. The cardinal,
eager for a blow against the young poet, commissioned Corneille's
intimate friend Boisrobert to write to him at Rouen on the subject.
Corneille evaded giving an assent, on the score that the task in
question was unworthy to occupy the academy; but, pressed by reiterated
letters, he at last replied, that the academy could do as it liked;
adding, "and as you say that his eminence would be glad to see their
decision, and be diverted by it, I can have no objection." On this,
Richelieu urged the academy to its task. Three of their number. De
Bourzey, Des Marets, and Chapelain, were commissioned to draw up a
judgment: each performed his work apart; and Chapelain cooked it into
form, and presented it to the cardinal for his approbation. Richelieu
wrote his observations in the margin, and his grudge against the poet
suggested at least one ill-natured one. The academy, as an excuse for
their criticisms, remarked, that the discussions concerning the greatest
works, the "Jerusalem" of Tasso, and the "Pastor Fido," tended to
improve the art of poetry. Richelieu observed on this, "The praise and
blame of the 'Cid' is a dispute between the learned and the ignorant,
while the discussions on the other works mentioned were between clever
men."[14] The work of the academy was, however, not over. The cardinal
recommended that a few handsful of flowers should be scattered over
Chapelain's criticism; but, when these flowers were added, he found them
far too fragrant and ornamental, and had them plucked up and thrown away.
[Sidenote: 1637.
Ætat.
31.]
After a good deal of discussion, and five months' labour, the judgment
of the academy was got up and printed. Scuderi hailed it as a sentence
in his favour: Corneille was not so well pleased; but, after some
indecision, he resolved to abstain from all reply. Such a course was the
most dignified; and he excused the failure of respect it might show to
the academy on the score that it marked a higher degree towards the
cardinal.
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