The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 5, May 1860)Various
General
The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 5, May 1860)
Various
England -- Periodicals; English literature -- Periodicals; Short stories, English -- Periodicals
Between 1727 and 1730, Hogarth appears to have painted dozens of single
portraits, “conversations,” and “assemblies.” In the list he himself
scheduled are to be noticed “four figures for Mr. Wood” (1728); “six
figures for Mr. Cock” (1728); “an assembly of twenty-five figures for my
Lord Castlemaine” (1729); “five for the Duke of Montagu;” nine for Mr.
Vernon, four for Mr. Wood, and so forth. The prices paid for “Assemblies”
appear to have fluctuated between ten and thirty guineas. The oddest, and
nearly the earliest commission he received for a portrait was in 1726,
when several of the eminent surgeons of the day subscribed their guinea
a-piece for him to compose a burlesque “conversation” of Mary Tofts, the
infamous rabbit-breeding impostor of Godalming; and St. André, chirurgeon
to the King’s household, a highly successful and most impudent quack,
who had made himself very busy in the scandalous hoax, and pretended
to believe in Tofts. For the story that Hogarth made a drawing of Jack
Sheppard in Newgate (1724), at the time when Sir James painted the
robber’s half-length in oils—the imaginary scene is admirably etched by
George Cruikshank in one of his illustrations to Mr. Ainsworth’s strange
novel—there does not seem any foundation. W. H. certainly painted Sarah
Malcolm, the murderess, in her cell, in 1733; and from that well-known
and authenticated fact some persons may have jumped at the conclusion
that he was limner in ordinary to the Old Bailey.
I dwelt persistently in the preceding section of these essays upon
the scenes and characters, the vices and follies, the humours and
eccentricities, the beauties and uglinesses, that Hogarth must have seen
in his young manhood, and asked and thought about, and which must have
sunk into his mind and taken root there. Satirists can owe but little to
inspiration. They can move the world with the lever of wit, but they must
have a fulcrum of fact. Their philosophy is properly of the inductive
order. Without facts, facts to reason upon, their arguments would be
tedious and pointless. Wherein lies the force or direction of satirizing
that Chinese mandarin whom you never saw—that Zulu Kaffir who never came
out of his kraal but once, and then to steal a cow? It was Hogarth’s
faculty to catch the manners living as they rose; it was his province
to watch their rising, and to walk abroad, an early bird, to pick up
the worms of knavery and vice, to range the ample field, and see what
the open and what the covert yielded. From twenty to thirty the social
philosopher must OBSERVE. If he grovel in the mud even, he must observe
and take stock of the humane passer-by who stoops to pick him up. After
thirty he had better go into his study, turn on his lamp, and turn out
the contents of his mind’s commonplace book upon paper. This is the only
valid excuse for what is termed, after a Frenchman’s Quartier-Latin-argot
phrase “Bohemianism:” the only excuse for Fielding’s Covent Garden
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