Art; English literature -- History and criticism; Literature -- History and criticism
[5] The week after this article appeared Sir Frederick Pollock wrote to
the _Athenaeum_ complaining of my having called Spedding a prig. Well,
here is a sample of what Spedding has to say about "Melincourt":
"Had the business ended here we should have thought that the
author's better genius had prevailed. We might indeed have
questioned many of his doctrines, both social and political; and
shown cause to doubt whether in the faithful bosom of real nature
they would yield so fair a harvest as in the more accommodating soil
of fiction. But we should have met him with undivided sympathy, as
no idle talker on no idle theme. This, however, his worst genius
interferes to prevent. He has only a half faith in the cause he has
espoused, and dares not let go his interest with the other party. It
is as if, having, in sport or curiosity, raised the veil of truth,
he had felt rebuked by the severity of her aspect, and turned for
relief to more than usual levity and mockery. Hence the perpetual
interruption of the serious and affecting, and sometimes even awful,
interest which belongs to the main argument of the piece, by scenes
of farcical and extravagant caricature which might be pleasant
enough as varieties in that farce of unreason with which he usually
entertains us, but which, coming upon the mind in a state of serious
emotion, are offensive and disagreeable. The two styles appear two
opposite and incompatible moods; and it is impossible so to govern
the imagination or the sympathies as to be in the humour for both.
If you are not disgusted with the lighter, you cannot but be wearied
with the graver."
And again:
"As it is, this affected contrast [the contrast which Spedding
thinks Peacock may have intended between the beauty of Forester and
Anthelia's view of life, and the "gross pictures of corruption,
quackery, and worldliness" with which he surrounds them], instead of
bringing the virtue of his hero into stronger relief, serves only to
make more conspicuous his own want of constancy in his purpose and
faith in his principles."
Spedding solemnly proceeds to give Peacock a little advice about the
construction of his novels, and recommends that "Melincourt" should be
divided into two stories: one to deal with the adventures of Sir Oran
Haut-ton and his election for the borough of Onevote; the other to treat
of "the graver questions concerning the realizations of the spirit of
chivalry under the forms of modern society ... with Forester and
Anthelia for the central figures."
"If he would but set about this latter task in a faithful spirit, we
do not fear to predict, from the specimen which the tale before us,
even in its present state, exhibits, that he would produce a work of
far higher and more enduring interest than any he has yet
attempted."
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