The Collected Writing of Thomas De Quincey, Vol. IIDe Quincey, Thomas
History
The Collected Writing of Thomas De Quincey, Vol. II
De Quincey, Thomas
De Quincey, Thomas, 1785-1859; English literature -- 19th century
I have mentioned Paley as accidentally connected with my _début_ in
literary conversation; and I have taken occasion to say how much I
admired his style and its unstudied graces, how profoundly I despised
his philosophy. I shall here say a word or two more on that subject. As
respects his style, though secretly despising the opinion avowed by my
tutor (which was, however, a natural opinion for a stiff lover of the
artificial and the pompous), I would just as unwillingly be supposed
to adopt the extravagant opinions, in the other extreme, of Dr. Parr
and Mr. Coleridge. These two gentlemen, who privately hated Paley,
and, perhaps, traduced him, have hung like bees over one particular
paragraph in his Evidences, as though it were a flower transplanted
from Hymettus. Dr. Parr pronounced it the finest sentence in the
English language. It is a period (that is, a cluster of sentences)
moderately well, but not _too_ well, constructed, as the German
nurses are accustomed to say. Its felicity depends on a trick easily
imitated--on a balance happily placed (namely, "_in which the wisest
of mankind would rejoice to find an answer to their doubts and rest to
their inquiries_)." As a _bravura_, or _tour de force_, in the dazzling
fence of rhetoric, it is surpassed by many hundreds of passages which
might be produced from rhetoricians; or, to confine myself to Paley's
contemporaries, it is very far surpassed by a particular passage in
Burke's letter upon the Duke of Bedford's base attack upon him in
the House of Lords; which passage I shall elsewhere produce, because
I happen to know, on the authority of Burke's executors, that Burke
himself considered it the finest period which he had ever written.
At present, I will only make one remark, viz. that it is always
injudicious, in the highest degree, to cite for admiration that which
is not a _representative_ specimen of the author's manner. In reading
Lucian, I once stumbled on a passage of German pathos, and of German
effect. Would it have been wise, or would it have been intellectually
just, to quote this as the text of an eulogium on Lucian? What
false criticism it would have suggested to every reader! what false
anticipations! To quote a formal and periodic pile of sentences was to
give the feeling that Paley was what the regular rhetorical artists
designate as a periodic writer, when, in fact, no one conceivable
character of style more pointedly contradicted the true description of
his merits.
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