The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 3, March 1860) — John Shaqi
The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 3, March 1860)Various
History
The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 3, March 1860)
Various
England -- Periodicals; English literature -- Periodicals; Short stories, English -- Periodicals
and, curiously, Alexander the Great of Twickenham seemed to be afraid of
Hogarth, and shook not the slightest drop of his gall vial over him. What
a quarrel it might have been between the acrimonious little scorpion of
“Twitnam,” and the sturdy bluebottle of Leicester Fields! Imagine Pope
_versus_ Hogarth, pencil against pen; not when the painter was old and
feeble, half but not quite doting indeed, as when he warred with Wilkes
and Churchill, but in the strength and pride of his swingeing satire.
Perhaps William and Alexander respected one another; but I think there
must have been some tacit “hit me and I’ll hit you” kind of rivalry
between them, as between two cocks of two different schools who meet now
and then on the public promenades—meet with a significant half-smile and
a clenching of the fist under the cuff of the jacket.
To the end of his life Hogarth could not spell; at least, his was not
the orthography expected from educated persons in a polite age. In
almost the last plate he engraved, the famous portrait of Churchill as
a Bear, the “lies,” with which the knots of Bruin’s club are inscribed,
are all “lyes.” This may be passed over, considering how very lax and
vague were our orthographical canons not more than a century ago, and
how many ministers, divines, poets—nay, princes, and crowned heads,
and nabobs—permitted themselves greater liberties than “lye” for “lie”
in the Georgian era. At this I have elsewhere hinted, and I think the
biographers of Hogarth are somewhat harsh in accusing him of crass
ignorance, when he only wrote as My Lord Keeper, or as Lady Betty, or
as his grace the Archbishop was wont to write. Hogarth, too, was an
author. He published a book—to say nothing of the manuscript notes of his
life he left. The whole structure, soul, and strength of the _Analysis
of Beauty_ are undoubtedly his; although he very probably profited by
the assistance—grammatical as well as critical—of some of the clerical
dignitaries who loved the good man. That he did so has been positively
asserted; but it is forestalling matters to trot out an old man’s hobby,
when our beardless lad is not bound ’prentice yet. I cannot, however,
defend him from the charges of writing “militia,” “milicia,” “Prussia,”
“Prusia”—why didn’t he hazard “Prooshia” at once?[2]—“knuckles,”
“nuckles”—oh, fie!—“Chalcedonians,” “Calcidonians;” “pity,” “pitty;”
and “volumes,” “volumns.” It is somewhat strange that Hogarth himself
tells us that his first graphic exercise was to “draw the alphabet with
great correctness.” I am afraid that he never succeeded in writing it
very correctly. He hated the French too sincerely to care to learn
_their_ language; and it is not surprising that in the first shop card
he engraved for his master there should be in the French translation of
Mr. Gamble’s style and titles a trifling pleonasm: “bijouxs,” instead of
“bijoux.”
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