The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 06 (of 12)Hazlitt, William
General
The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 06 (of 12)
Hazlitt, William
English essays -- 19th century
It is not easy to write a familiar style. Many people mistake a
familiar for a vulgar style, and suppose that to write without
affectation is to write at random. On the contrary, there is nothing
that requires more precision, and, if I may so say, purity of
expression, than the style I am speaking of. It utterly rejects not
only all unmeaning pomp, but all low, cant phrases, and loose,
unconnected, _slipshod_ allusions. It is not to take the first word
that offers, but the best word in common use; it is not to throw words
together in any combinations we please, but to follow and avail
ourselves of the true idiom of the language. To write a genuine
familiar or truly English style, is to write as any one would speak in
common conversation, who had a thorough command and choice of words,
or who could discourse with ease, force, and perspicuity, setting
aside all pedantic and oratorical flourishes. Or to give another
illustration, to write naturally is the same thing in regard to common
conversation, as to read naturally is in regard to common speech. It
does not follow that it is an easy thing to give the true accent and
inflection to the words you utter, because you do not attempt to rise
above the level of ordinary life and colloquial speaking. You do not
assume indeed the solemnity of the pulpit, or the tone of
stage-declamation: neither are you at liberty to gabble on at a
venture, without emphasis or discretion, or to resort to vulgar
dialect or clownish pronunciation. You must steer a middle course. You
are tied down to a given and appropriate articulation, which is
determined by the habitual associations between sense and sound, and
which you can only hit by entering into the author’s meaning, as you
must find the proper words and style to express yourself by fixing
your thoughts on the subject you have to write about. Any one may
mouth out a passage with a theatrical cadence, or get upon stilts to
tell his thoughts: but to write or speak with propriety and simplicity
is a more difficult task. Thus it is easy to affect a pompous style,
to use a word twice as big as the thing you want to express: it is not
so easy to pitch upon the very word that exactly fits it. Out of eight
or ten words equally common, equally intelligible, with nearly equal
pretensions, it is a matter of some nicety and discrimination to pick
out the very one, the preferableness of which is scarcely perceptible,
but decisive. The reason why I object to Dr. Johnson’s style is, that
there is no discrimination, no selection, no variety in it. He uses
none but ‘tall, opaque words,’ taken from the ‘first row of the
rubric:’—words with the greatest number of syllables, or Latin phrases
with merely English terminations. If a fine style depended on this
sort of arbitrary pretension, it would be fair to judge of an author’s
elegance by the measurement of his words, and the substitution of
foreign circumlocutions (with no precise associations) for the
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