The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 08 (of 12)Hazlitt, William
General
The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 08 (of 12)
Hazlitt, William
English essays -- 19th century
Bickerstaff’s plays and comic operas are continually acted: they come
under the class of mediocrity, generally speaking. Their popularity
seems to be chiefly owing to the unaffected ease and want of pretension
with which they are written, with a certain humorous _naïveté_ in the
lower characters, and an exquisite adaptation of the music to the songs.
His Love in a Village is one of the most delightful comic operas on the
stage. It is truly pastoral; and the sense of music hovers over the very
scene like the breath of morning. In his alteration of the Tartuffe he
has spoiled the Hypocrite, but he has added Maw-worm.
Mrs. Cowley’s comedy of the Belles’ Stratagem, Who’s the Dupe, and
others, are of the second or third class: they are rather
_refaccimentos_ of the characters, incidents, and materials of former
writers, got up with considerable liveliness and ingenuity, than
original compositions, with marked qualities of their own.
Goldsmith’s Good-natured Man is inferior to She Stoops to Conquer; and
even this last play, with all its shifting vivacity, is rather a
sportive and whimsical effusion of the author’s fancy, a delightful and
delicately managed caricature, than a genuine comedy.
Murphy’s plays of All in the Wrong and Know Your Own Mind, are admirably
written; with sense, spirit, and conception of character: but without
any great effect of the humorous, or that truth of feeling which
distinguishes the boundary between the absurdities of natural character
and the gratuitous fictions of the poet’s pen. The heroes of these two
plays, Millamour and Sir Benjamin Constant, are too ridiculous in their
caprices to be tolerated, except in farce; and yet their follies are so
flimsy, so motiveless, and fine-spun, as not to be intelligible, or to
have any effect in their only proper sphere. Both his principal pieces
are said to have suffered by their similarity, first, to Colman’s
Jealous Wife, and next to the School for Scandal, though in both cases
he had the undoubted priority. It is hard that the fate of plagiarism
should attend upon originality: yet it is clear that the elements of the
School for Scandal are not sparingly scattered in Murphy’s comedy of
Know your own Mind, which appeared before the latter play, only to be
eclipsed by it. This brings me to speak of Sheridan.
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