The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 12 (of 12)Hazlitt, William
General
The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 12 (of 12)
Hazlitt, William
English essays -- 19th century
sight of the bee-hives from which it had been taken, and a garden full
of thyme and wild flowers that had produced it. On this occasion
Coleridge spoke of Virgil’s Georgics, but not well. I do not think he
had much feeling for the classical or elegant. It was in this room that
we found a little worn-out copy of the _Seasons_, lying in a
window-seat, on which Coleridge exclaimed, ‘_That_ is true fame!’ He
said Thomson was a great poet, rather than a good one; his style was as
meretricious as his thoughts were natural. He spoke of Cowper as the
best modern poet. He said the _Lyrical Ballads_ were an experiment about
to be tried by him and Wordsworth, to see how far the public taste would
endure poetry written in a more natural and simple style than had
hitherto been attempted; totally discarding the artifices of poetical
diction, and making use only of such words as had probably been common
in the most ordinary language since the days of Henry II. Some
comparison was introduced between Shakespear and Milton. He said ‘he
hardly knew which to prefer. Shakespear appeared to him a mere stripling
in the art; he was as tall and as strong, with infinitely more activity
than Milton, but he never appeared to have come to man’s estate; or if
he had, he would not have been a man, but a monster.’ He spoke with
contempt of Gray, and with intolerance of Pope. He did not like the
versification of the latter. He observed that ‘the ears of these
couplet-writers might be charged with having short memories, that could
not retain the harmony of whole passages.’ He thought little of Junius
as a writer; he had a dislike of Dr. Johnson; and a much higher opinion
of Burke as an orator and politician, than of Fox or Pitt. He however
thought him very inferior in richness of style and imagery to some of
our elder prose-writers, particularly Jeremy Taylor. He liked
Richardson, but not Fielding; nor could I get him to enter into the
merits of _Caleb Williams_.[52] In short, he was profound and
discriminating with respect to those authors whom he liked, and where he
gave his judgment fair play; capricious, perverse, and prejudiced in his
antipathies and distastes. We loitered on the ‘ribbed sea-sands,’ in
such talk as this, a whole morning, and I recollect met with a curious
sea-weed, of which John Chester told us the country name! A fisherman
gave Coleridge an account of a boy that had been drowned the day before,
and that they had tried to save him at the risk of their own lives. He
said ‘he did not know how it was that they ventured, but, Sir, we have a
_nature_ towards one another.’ This expression, Coleridge remarked to
me, was a fine illustration of that theory of disinterestedness which I
(in common with Butler) had adopted. I broached to him an argument of
mine to prove that _likeness_ was not mere association of ideas. I said
that the mark in the sand put one in mind of a man’s foot, not because
it was part of a former impression of a man’s foot (for it was quite
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