The informal, disorderly syntax, the colloquial diction, the chatty tone, the run-on lines, the conscious roughness of meter and rhyme, may have derived from Churchill, but they become here more relevant than in any of Churchill's satires. They combine with the intemperate tone and the satirist's concluding confession, his self-identification with the object of satire, to create a sense of an unheroic satirist, one who does not represent a highly commendable satiric alternative. Satire must now turn its vision from the heroic, the apocalyptic, the broadly philosophical, even from the depraved, and become exceedingly ordinary. It must recognize that there is little hope in going back to lofty Augustan ideals. For such subjects, it uses the impulsive tone of an over-emotional satirist who is as flawed as the subject he satirizes and still represents the best of a disordered world. Lloyd had attempted an autobiographical satire in _The Curate_. He failed to create an important satire for a number of reasons, one of which was that he tried to present himself as a high ideal, a belief that he apparently held so weakly that the satire became merely petulant. Lloyd corrected this error in _The Methodist_ and now seems, however briefly, to have opened the way to a truly prophetic style of satire. After _The Methodist_ Lloyd wrote _Conversation_, a satire that not only failed to fulfill the promise of _The Methodist_ but is more conservative in theme and style than any of his earlier satires. After that work he produced little. He published an expanded version of _The Power of the Pen_ and a dull ode printed in _The Annual Register_. When William Kenrick, in _Love in the Suds_, implied that Garrick was Isaac Bickerstaff's lover, Lloyd defended Garrick in _Epistle to David Garrick_. Kenrick replied with _A Whipping for the Welch Parson_, an ironic Dunciad-Variorum-type editing of Lloyd's _Epistle_, in which he got much the better of Lloyd. Lloyd was no match for Kenrick at this sort of thing. Except for these uninteresting productions and his convivial friendship with Wilkes and Garrick, we hear not much more of Lloyd. We know so little about his life that we can only speculate why he failed to follow up the promise of _The Methodist_; why, after favorable reviews from the journals[7] and the flattering friendship of famous men, he was not encouraged to continue a career that was as promising as the early career of many famous satirists. The explanation may lie solely in his personality. Perhaps the moderate success he achieved and the financial rewards it brought were enough for him. Another explanation is suggested by the conservative ideas and style of _Conversation_, which are more like Pope's than are the ideas and style of any earlier satire of Lloyd's. In this satire he explicitly repudiates his older, freer critical dicta in both theory and practice: