 | Studies in bibliography |  |
II. On the Standards of Modern Criticism
Fielding was only the source of Murphy's reflections on "Imitation"; but
the essay "On the Standards of modern Criticism" is wholly his, and it is one
of the best of his humorous pieces of this kind. Opening with a favorite observation—that
"Character" is determined by a ruling passion that "gives a
casting Weight to the Genius" of a person—he regrets that there has been
no objective means of measuring the force and efficacy of the particular passion
necessary to produce the man of "Wit" or of "Humour," or, indeed, to
produce Nature's masterpiece, "the modern Critic." Fielding had long made
the latter the target of ridicule, most recently, for example, in the introductory
essays to Tom Jones (Book X: "Containing Instructions very necessary
to be perused by modern Critics"; and Book XI: "A Crust for the Critics")
and in The Covent-Garden Journal, Nos. 3 (11 January 1752) and 46 (9
June 1752).
Here, it appears to have been a particular modern critic whose taste and
judgment required the correction of being laughed at. Samuel Foote, actor
and mimic at the Covent-Garden Theatre, and a man Fielding despised (Life,
pp. 435-39), had belittled the gifts of David Garrick, the greatest actor of the
age—and, as the author of the essay calls him, "my little Friend of Drury
Lane": Foote was publicly arguing that Garrick at 5′6″ was physically too
short to be convincing in the role of a hero (see below, note 14). Affecting to
agree with Foote's premise, the solution Fielding proposes to the problem of
subjectivity when judging the pretensions of authors and critics is reminiscent
of the "physico-logical" schemes of Swift: having "shewn to a Demonstration"
that the qualifications of writers are entirely dependent on "the Height and
Stature of the Body"—a Wit is 5′6″, a Humorist is 5′8″, a practical Joker
5′10″, a Critic 6′—it follows that a yardstick in future must be "the only
infallible Criterion."
As I believe the evidence attests,[22]
de Castro's "suggestion" of nearly
was not only Fielding's good friend but, as Fielding's contributions to the
Gray's-Inn Journal make clear, his protégé as well; he is the most likely
author of the Dedication to The Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon. And if he
was author of the Dedication, Murphy, a professional writer and experienced
editor of manuscripts, would certainly be the most likely person to have been
employed by Millar to see through to publication the "perplexed autograph
manuscript" that Amory has described. And, to repeat de Castro's words, "If
that be so one can understand why Millar should have turned to him when
requiring an editor for the `Complete' Works" of 1762.
The complete text of the essay follows below, the copy text being the
only extant source: The Gray's-Inn Journal, No. 27 (21 April 1753), in the
1756 reprint, i. 174-179. The footnotes chiefly illustrate correspondences of
topics and phrasing with Fielding's known writings; an asterisk before a note
signals a particularly striking parallel. Notes followed by the letter "R" were
contributed by Dr. Frederick G. Ribble, who read this essay in typescript.
References to Fielding's works are to the Wesleyan Edition (Middletown,
CT, and Oxford: Wesleyan University Press and Oxford University Press,
1966/67- ), as follows in alphabetical order: Amelia, ed. M. C. Battestin
(1983); Contributions to The Champion and Related Writings, ed. W. B.
Coley (2003); The Covent-Garden Journal and A Plan of the Universal
Register-Office, ed. Bertrand A. Goldgar (1988); The Jacobite's Journal and
Related Writings, ed. W. B. Coley (1975); Joseph Andrews, ed. M. C. Battestin
(1966/67); Miscellanies, Volume One, ed. Henry Knight Miller (1972),
Volume Two and Volume Three, ed. Bertrand A. Goldgar and Hugh Amory
(1993 and 1997); Tom Jones, ed. M. C. Battestin and Fredson Bowers, 2 vols.
(1974/75), 2nd edn. paperback (Wesleyan UP, 1975); The True Patriot and
Related Writings, ed. W. B. Coley (1987). For Familiar Letters see Fielding's
Complete Works, ed. W. E. Henley, vol. 16 (1903); for The Masquerade, see
The Female Husband and Other Writings, ed. Claude E. Jones (Liverpool
University Press, 1960); for Shamela, see Joseph Andrews and Shamela, ed.
M. C. Battestin (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961); for The Journal of a
Voyage to Lisbon, ed. Tom Keymer (Penguin Books, 1996).
In the notes to the text, the following abbreviations are used:
Am = Amelia (1751)
CGJ = Covent-Garden Journal (1752)
C-H = Chadwyck-Healey online database
Eighteenth-Century Fiction
(Cambridge, England: Chadwyck-Healey
Ltd., 1996).Ch = The Champion (1739-1740)
DGA = A Dialogue between a Gentleman
of London . . . and an Honest Alderman (1747)EC = "Essay on Conversation" (1743)
FL = Familiar Letters (1747)
HF = Henry Fielding
JA = Joseph Andrews (1742)
JW = Jonathan Wild (1743)
JVL = Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon
JWN = Journey from This World to
the Next (1743)KCM = "Essay on the Knowledge of the
Characters of Men" (1743)Misc i, ii, iii = Miscellanies (1743), vols. 1,
2, 3OED = Oxford English Dictionary
Sh = An Apology for the Life of Mrs.
Shamela Andrews (1741)TE = The Twickenham Edition of the
Poems of Alexander Pope, ed.
John Butt et al., 11 vols. (New
Haven: Yale University Press,
1961-68).TJ = Tom Jones (1749)
TP = True Patriot (1745-1746)
Numb. 27. Gray's-Inn, Saturday, April 21, 1753.
THERE are few Terms which are applied with greater Impropriety, than
those characteristical Appellations, which Men usually bestow on their Acquaintance,
or on others, in whose Company and Conversation they may at
any Time have been casually engaged. Every Character, indeed, is formed by
the Prevalence of some particular Passion,[24]
which influences the Temper,
and gives a casting Weight to the Genius of the Person in whom it subsists.[25]
But no Rules that I know of, have been yet laid down,[26]
nor is there any certain
Standard which should fix the Degree of Elevation, to which the ruling
Passion must necessarily rise, before it can have Strength sufficient to determine
the Character.
The Reader must, however, be informed, that I am not speaking of those
moral Qualifications, or Endowments of the Heart, which speculative Writers
have taken so much idle Pains[27]
to adorn and recommend; and which Men
of Sense, or Men of the World, have unanimously agreed in rejecting, as unworthy
of their serious Notice. The Qualities I mean are pure Virtues of the
Head or Face; Properties, which enable the Possessor to assume a solemn
Aspect[28]
at Incidents, which set the rest of the Table on a Roar;[29]
or to interrupt
what is truly serious and grave, by impertinent Questions of Levity and
Mirth; or lastly, to condemn and cavil,[30]
when all the World sees the highest
Reasons for Applause and Admiration. The Effects which these Causes produce
in Life, however various and complicated in their Appearance, may be
reduced to the three general Sources of Wit, Humour, and Criticism, and as
the Pretenders to these several Qualities are infinite in Number,[31]
I have determined
on a certain Standard, in order to regulate and adjust their Claims.
The Method I propose is, to decide their different Pretensions by the Height
and Stature of the Body.
And lest this should be considered as a wild chimerical Design,[32]
I must
beg Leave to assure my Reader, that the Theory I am forming is built upon
the latest Discoveries, and most uncontroverted Principles of true Philosophy.
It is possible however, that Persons of an over-refining Curiosity,[33]
may be
able to raise some Objections to what I am going to advance, but as every
Thing is liable to be called in Question by those who are disposed to cavil,
they will give me but little Pain upon that Head.[34]
The plainest Truths have
been disputed, and the most extravagant Opinions have been fortunate
such People recollect what are the general Apprehensions arising in the
Mind, on the Sight of an uncommon Stature; and how favourable, withal,
even the Notions of the Vulgar[35] are to an unusual Height of Person. Is it
not commonly supposed, that Men of this superior Eminence possess as
superior Parts, and extraordinary Degrees of Merit. From this Principle, my
little Friend of Drury-Lane is universally censured, as falling short of a true
Hero, by near half a Foot;[36] whilst his more aspiring Antagonist is allowed
to have all the necessary Dimensions, required both by ancient and modern
Precedents, to constitute the heroic Character.
It is an Axiom in Philosophy,[37]
which few, I hope, will be so hardy as to
deny,[38]
that the Soul is all and all in every Part. From hence it is obvious,
that the Body which is a Covering only for the Ætherial Particle that is
lodged within it, must necessarily receive its Dimensions from the Vigour of
the Spirit, which actuates the exterior Frame. The greater Portion of Fire this
Spirit is endued with, its elastic Qualities will be proportionably stronger;
and the Dimensions of the Body will be protruded to a Size, exactly of the
same Dimensions with the Soul which informs it. On this simple Hypothesis,
which I imagine cannot be easily disproved, I proceed to settle the respective
Qualifications of the different Pretenders, who have been mentioned above.
In the first Place, those who, with gentle William in the Play,[39]
boast
themselves not on Account of their Wisdom, but as they have a pretty Wit,
do not exceed the lowest Degree of our appointed Standard. It is not in Nature,
that such Persons can rise in their Stature, above the Height of five
Feet and six Inches.[40]
For Wit, which is merely an Exercise of the Tongue,
doth[41]
not require the same Bulk and Dimensions, which are essential to
Qualifications of a superior Order. It is evidently a much less Exertion of the
interior Faculties, than what are productive of that Talent which we call
Humour. Hence we must advance a little in our Standard; and can admit
no one to be a Man of real Humour, who does not come up to the full Height
of five Feet and eight Inches; and this small Progression is the more allowable,
as a considerable Part of Humour is frequently expressed by such Feats
of Body, as require some little Degree of Size and Strength.[42]
Giving a Friend
a violent and unexpected Slap on the Back, or the dexterous Leaping over
Chairs and Tables, have been often regarded as so many undoubted Signs of
genuine Humour;[43]
and are generally agreed to denote a most facetious Vein
of Pleasantry,[44]
in the Authors of such exquisite Jokes.[45]
It will sometimes
further happen, that these two Qualities may be blended in the same Person;
as I doubt not but many of my Readers can recollect several of their Acquaintance,
who are your only Men of Wit and Humour. Now, this Conjunction
manifestly implies a much superior Energy of Soul;[46]
and consequently, a
still higher Advancement in our Scale of characteristic Excellencies. These
Candidates for Fame will accordingly rise two Inches above those who are
mentioned last; and none are to pass under the Denomination for the future,
but whose Height is five Feet ten. For these Qualities, when thus united, will
so much the more honourable as they are dangerous to the Person or the
Purse of the ingenious Artist, who has the Courage or Curiosity to attempt
the Experiment. The demolishing Windows, knocking down of Watchmen,
bilking[48] of Waiters at Places of Entertainment, with other Instances of the
like Kind, are very laudable and convincing Proofs of these compound Qualities,
residing together in the same Habitation.[49] The last Quality, which
greatly overtops the rest, and is indeed the Crown and Perfection of all, is
the wonderful[50] and most ingenious Faculty of modern Criticism. And as
this is, in the most exalted Manner, the Gift of Nature, whoever has the
Happiness to be born a true Critic, is at least six Feet complete. A Critic is
the Master-piece and noblest Work of Nature;[51] and may justly be expected
to bear about him[52] some distinguishing Tokens,[53] which will enable a
Spectator, at the first View, to acknowledge and revere his Merits. Hence she
has bestowed on him a more than ordinary Portion of the Daring and Tremendous;[54]
and these would appear to very little Effect in a Person of less
Dimensions, than those which we have here assigned him. The Wit may be
pert and sanguine;[55] the Man of Humour confident or overbearing; but it is
the Critic alone, who glares horribly terrific. His every Look freezes the young
Author's Blood;[56] and at the Sound of his Voice, the rooted Seats have been
known to be torn from the Ground, and hurled violently through the Air, in
furious and wild Commotion.[57] Phænomena,[58] like these, can only be produced
by that iron Strength of Lungs,[59] and brazen Audacity of Figure, which
Nature has so liberally imparted to the modern Critic.
It will be necessary to obviate[60]
an Objection arising from popular Prejudice,
that the Science of Criticism[61]
being to examine into the Merit of all
Productions of Genius and Learning, it does not seem to demand the Size
and Dimensions which I have made essential to the Character; but the Objectors,
I apprehend, are mistaken in the End of modern Criticism; and have
not perhaps duly reflected on[62]
the necessary Qualities to discharge the
Province[63]
they are desirous of allotting it. To execute that Task,[64]
would
require a moderate Portion of Sense, Taste and Judgment, under the Direction
of Modesty and Candour; Talents so little practised by those who have
taken up the Occupation of a a [sic] Critic, that they appear on all Occasions
not to have the least Conception of them. Whoever will give himself Leave
to consider, that the Character of a Critic, a Wit, and Man of Humour, in
the present Estimation of the World, is supported[65]
wholly by Mechanical
Operations,[66]
in which the Understanding has no Manner of Share,[67]
he will
easily agree with me, that the surest Method to discover those Characters,
must be taken from that Part which is principally concerned; and as we can
truly judge from outward Appearances alone, I have shewn to a Demonstration
that the Stature of a Person is the only infallible Criterion, by which
we can decide, on the Justness of his Pretensions; and that no one for the
future can have any Right to either of those Characters, but whose Dimensions
will exactly tally with the Measures of this Standard.
In addition to the evidence for Fielding's authorship presented in this essay, I
report the conclusion of Michael and Jill Farringdon, who have conducted a computerassisted
analysis: "Attribution analysis using the cusum technique—and taking for comparison
material from Fielding's Joseph Andrews and Nicholas Amhurst's The Craftsman
No. 396—shows the whole essay is indistinguishable from Fielding's material and clearly
separates from Armhurst's material." On the cusum technique, see Jill M. Farringdon,
Analysing for Authorship: A Guide to the Cusum Technique (Cardiff: University of Wales
Press, 1996).
Aeneid, x. 767: the tyrant Mezentius "walks the ground with head hidden in the
clouds" (trans. H. Rushton Fairclough, Loeb Library, 1916).
"the Prevalence of some particular Passion": Cf. JA (I. xviii) "the latter Passion was
far more prevalent" (p. 88). —R
"Every Character . . . subsists": The theory that character is determined by a
dominant passion is fundamental to HF's view of human nature. Cf. KCM, where he comments:
"that immense Variety of Characters . . . could hardly exist, unless the Distinction
had some original Foundation in Nature itself," and then declares that "among all these,
there subsists . . . so manifest and extreme a Difference of Inclination or Character, that
almost obliges us to acknowledge some unacquired, original Distinction, in the Nature or
Soul of one Man, from that of another" (Misc i. 153-154). Also CGJ No. 55 (18 July 1752),
where he explains the "Notion of Humour" (i.e. a ruling passion) as "nothing more than a
violent Bent or Disposition of the Mind to some particular Point" (p. 300).
"no Rules . . . yet laid down": C-H cites 49 instances in HF's fiction of "Rules" in
the sense of a set of principles or regulations governing conduct, an art or science, etc.
With the phrasing here, cf. EC, where HF will "lay down some general Rules" on the
subject of "Good Breeding" (Misc i. 128); also TJ (V. i) "we have laid it down as a Rule";
"to lay down dogmatical Rules in any Art or Science" and "the Rules . . . laid down by
those great Judges" (pp. 209, 210, 211); Am (IV. iii) "to lay down any fixed and certain
Rules" (p. 161); JVL "lay down only one general rule" (p. 6); "my own rule laid down in my
preface" (p. 15).
"idle Pains": C-H cites 34 instances of "idle" in HF's fiction, 8 of which are in the
present sense of "without purpose, meaningless": e.g. JWN (I. ii) "idle Opinions" (Misc ii.
10); JW (III. ii) "as vain and idle, as to bid the . . . River to cease to run" (Misc iii. 95);
TJ (IV. i) "idle Romances" (p. 150); (XII. v) "idle Trumpery" (p. 639); (XII. vi) "idle
Shows" (p. 641); (XV. iii) ("idle Stories") (p. 790).
"assume a solemn Aspect": C-H cites 27 instances in HF's fiction of "Aspect" referring
to the appearance of a person or situation: in the present context cf., especially,
TJ (VIII. vi), where Partridge the barber/surgeon explains to Jones: " `You can't imagine,
Sir, of how much Consequence a grave Aspect is to a Grave Character. A Barber may make
you laugh, but a Surgeon ought to make you cry' " (p. 423). Also (I. xii), where Captain
Blifil affects "great Gravity of Aspect" (p. 69).
"set the Table on a Roar": C-H cites 34 instances in HF's fiction of the verb "roar,"
including TJ (VII. iv), Squire Western's "extraordinary Degree of roaring Mirth" (p. 339).
"to . . . cavil": C-H cites 4 instances of "cavil" in HF's fiction, 2 as a noun and 2 as a
verb, e.g. TJ (I. i) "Nor do I fear that my sensible Reader . . . will start, cavil, or be
offended, because I have named but one Article" (p. 32); (V. i) "I have been surprized that
Horace should cavil at this Art in Homer" (p. 214).
"infinite in Number": These two words were among HF's favorites. C-H cites 77
instances in HF's fiction of "infinite/infinitely" and 130 of "number/numberless" denoting
quantity (not a numeral). Used together, cf. JWN (I. viii) "infinite Numbers of Spirits"
(Misc ii. 36).
"chimerical Design": The adjective "chimerical" was a particular favorite of HF's:
cf. Ch (26 Jan. 1739/40) "chimerical System" (p. 142); (3 May 1740) "a chimerical Good," "so
chimerical a Reward," "chimerical Expectations" (pp. 298-299); TP (26 Nov. 1745) "chimerical"
concerns (p. 139); (24 Dec. 1745) "chimerical" apprehensions (p. 163); (6-13 May
1746) "such chimerical Good" (p. 288); DGA "chimerical Enterprizes" and "Grievances"
(pp. 49, 57, 59). In addition to these examples and the 4 citations in C-H of "chimerical"
and "Chimera" in HF's fiction, a further 9, at least, occur in his works from The Modern
Husband (1732) to the posthumous Fragment of a Comment on Bolingbroke.
"an over-refining Curiosity": Beginning with the opening line of his earliest extant
publication—The Masquerade (1728): "Some call Curiosity an evil"—HF was fascinated by
the fact of human inquisitiveness; C-H cites 112 instances of "Curiosity" in the fiction alone.
"upon that Head": A favorite locution of HF's: e.g. JA (III. ii) "the utmost Perfection
on that Head" (p. 199); TJ (IV. xiv) "be silent on that Head" (p. 206); Am (I. vii)
"susceptible of Flattery on that Head" (p. 49); (V. ix) "my Assurances on that Head" (p.
228); (VII. viii) "to comfort me on that Head" (p. 298).
"the Notions of the Vulgar": C-H cites 85 instances in HF's fiction of "vulgar" or
"vulgarly." With the idea expressed by the present phrase, cf. JA (Preface) "in vulgar
Opinion" (p. 5); (III. iii) "that vulgar Opinion" (p. 214); JW (I. v) "the vulgar erroneous
Estimation of Things" (p. 23); TJ (XVII. i) "Mythology . . . more firmly believed by the
Vulgar" (p. 876); XVIII. iii) "the vulgar Observation" (p. 933); A (II.i) "the vulgar Opinion
of the Fatality of Marriage" (p. 67); (VII. x) "no greater vulgar Error" (p. 306).
"my little Friend . . . half a Foot": In A Treatise on the Passions (1747), Samuel
Foote complained that HF's close friend David Garrick, rival to Spranger Barry at CoventGarden,
was too small in stature to be effective in heroic roles: "And as the Eye is the
Scence [sic] first gratified, or disgusted, it may not be improper to enquire what kind of
Prepossession arises in the Mind, from the Appearance of Mr. G's Figure, and here I am
afraid frail Nature has been a little unkind, and tho' I must own I have very distinct Ideas
of big and great, yet such is the Folly of the Million, that they expect a more than ordinary
Appearance from a Man, who is to perform extraordinary Actions; it it is in vain, to tell
them, that Charles of Sweden, was but five-feet five, or Alexander the Great, a very little
Man" (p. 14). In TJ (XVI. v) HF (who was himself tall, "rising above six feet," as Murphy
remembered in his Essay) rebuts this criticism by having Partridge, with Jones watching
Hamlet at Drury Lane, twice refer to Garrick in the title role as a "little Man" (p. 854);
yet, however unimpressive his stature, Garrick's acting when confronting the ghost has
most effectively terrified him.
"few . . . will be so hardy as to deny": Cf. JWN (I. v) "will any of you be so
insensible or ungrateful, as to deny" (Misc ii. 27); Am (XI. i) "Why will you be so barbarous
to deny" (p. 454). —R
"gentle William in the Play": Referring to Fribble the fop, a part played by Garrick
(see above, n. 14) in his popular farce, Miss in Her Teens (1747), which was staged at
Drury Lane for the first time this season on 28 April 1753, a week after this essay was published.
In Act II, scene I, Fribble reads a poem entitled, "William Fribble, Esq; to Miss
Biddy Bellair," in which he assures her "No brutal passion fires my breast, . . . But one of
harmless, gentle kind, / Whose joys are centred—in the mind." When asked her opinion of
the verses, Biddy replies: "I swear they are very pretty—but I don't quite understand 'em"
(Eighteenth Century Drama: Afterpieces, ed. Richard W. Bevis [Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1970], p. 96).
Garrick, the author's "little Friend of Drury-Lane" (above, n. 14), who acted the
part of "gentle William" the fop in Miss in Her Teens (above, n. 17), is said to have been
5′6″.
"doth": This is the sole occurrence in the essay of HF's characteristic preference
for the archaic forms doth and hath; subsequently, does occurs twice and has five times.
Since Murphy throughout the journal prefers does and has, it is tempting to suppose that
the compositor began setting the type by following the reading of the manuscript before,
in the seven subsequent instances, imposing the house style on HF's archaisms—such was in
fact the case with a contribution HF made to Common Sense in 1738, where the manuscript
hath was systematically changed to has (see M. C. with R. R. Battestin, "A Fielding Discovery,
with Some Remarks on the Canon," Studies in Bibliography 33 [1980], p. 135). On
the uncertain usefulness of hath and doth as a stylistic test of HF's writing, see W. B. Coley,
TP, Appendix VI.
"require some little Degree of Size and Strength": Cf. TJ (IX. i) "require some
little Degree of Learning and Knowledge" (p. 489); JVL "acquired some little degree of
strength" (p. 17). Also TJ (III. vi) "no little Degree of Inveteracy" (p. 138); (XI. iii)
"she had . . . some little Degree of natural Courage" (p. 579); Am (IV. ix) "to introduce
some little Degree of Love or Friendship" (p. 192). —R
"a considerable Part . . . Signs of genuine Humour": Cf. KCM, where HF, on the
causes of laughter, quotes Pope's Dunciad: "Gentle Dulness ever loves a Joke. / i.e. one of
her own Jokes. These are sometimes performed by the Foot; as by leaping over Heads, or
Chairs, or Tables, Kicks in the B—ch, &c. sometimes by the Hand; as by Slaps in the
Face, pulling off Wigs, and infinite other Dexterities" (Misc i. 161). And in EC, recalling
the sort of buffoonery practised on Parson Adams by the followers of the "roasting" squire
(JA III. vii), he writes of "that Kind of Raillery . . . which is concerned in tossing Men
out of their Chairs, tumbling them into Water, or any of those handicraft Jokes" (Misc
i. 150).
"a most facetious Vein of Pleasantry"; Cf. Dr. Harrison in Am (IX. v), who possessed
"a Vein of Cheerfulness, Good-humour and Pleasantry" (p. 377); C-H records 12 instances
in HF's fiction of "facetious" as various parts of speech: e.g. TJ (VIII. viii) "a most facetious
Grin" (p. 432).
"exquisite Jokes": Cf. above note 21. In KCM introducing the line from the Dunciad
about Dulness loving a "Joke," HF admires Pope's "exquisite Pleasantry."
"Energy of Soul": Dr. Ribble reminds me that " `Energy' is a distinctive, semitechnical
term in Fielding's moral psychology, based on Aristotle's notion of energeia" and
refers to his article, "Aristotle and the `Prudence' Theme of Tom Jones," EighteenthCentury
Studies 15 (1981), p. 38, which includes these references: FL "all the energies of
love" (p. 51); TJ (XIII. i) "those strong Energies of a good Mind" (p. 687); Am (III. v)
"the . . . Energies of that Passion" (p. 115); (VIII. x) "an Energy, a Habit, as Aristotle calls
it" (p. 351); CGJ (14 March 1752) "the Energies of Benevolence" (p. 142 and n. 1); "that
Compassion which is the constant Energy of these good Hearts" (p. 143); (11 April 1752)
"In the Energy itself of Virtue (says Aristotle) there is great Pleasure" (p. 185). —R
"Strokes": A favorite locution of HF's. C-H records the following 6 instances in
the fiction: Sh (To Miss Fanny) "you have . . . brightened many strokes in this work" (p.
301); JA (I. ix) "some Strokes which every one will not truly comprehend" (p. 42); (III. x)
"there are . . . manly Strokes . . . in your last Tragedy" (p. 261); TJ (I. iii) "There were
some Strokes in this Speech" (p. 41); (IX. i) "the nicest Strokes of a Shakespear" (p. 493);
Am (III. xi) "Thus she ran on, and after many bitter Strokes upon her Sister" (p. 142).
Also JVL "we acknowledge the strokes of nature" (p. 8).
"compound Qualities . . . in the same Habitation": In the fourth paragraph of
the essay, "the Body" is defined as "a Covering only for the Ætherial Particle [i.e. the
"Soul" or "Spirit"] that is lodged within it." The "compound Quality" that defines the
Man of Wit and Humour gives him "a much superior Energy of Soul," and that soul resides
in a body 5′ 10″ tall, its "Habitation." In JWN, HF had the spirits of the dead use
the same conceit: the narrator speaks of his life on earth as "my Habitation in the Body";
his companion, who died of a violent fever, speaks of his body as "the inflamed Habitation
I am lately departed from" (Misc ii. 8, 10). HF often refers to the dwelling places of his
characters as their "Habitations": C-H records 20 instances in the fiction alone (including
the two quoted).
"wonderful": For this sarcastic use of the word, see TJ (XIV. i) "by the wonderful
Force of Genius only" (p. 739). Also JA (II. vii) "a wonderful Capacity" (p. 130);
(III. i) "the wonderful Extent of human Genius" (p. 187); JW (I. i) "those wonderful Productions
of Nature called Great Men" (p. 7); (II. xi) "The Great and wonderful Behaviour
of our Hero" (p. 80); TJ (VI. i) "certain Philosophers, among many other wonderful Discoveries"
(p. 268); Am (VIII. vi) "by his own Account, he was the Author of most of the
wonderful Productions of the Age" (p. 332). —R
"the Master-piece and noblest Work of Nature": Cf. JW (I. x) "Individuals . . .
who do not seem intended by Nature as her greatest Master-piece" (Misc iii. 35). Also
Misc i "A perfect Work! the Iliad of Nature!" (i. 12); JA (III. ii) "the Iliad, his noblest
Work" (p. 198). —R
"to bear about him": Cf. TJ (IV. ix) "yet did he bear about him some thing of
what the Antients called the Irascible" (p. 186). —R
"some distinguishing Tokens": HF often used "Token" as a synonym for "sign";
C-H lists 13 instances in the fiction: e.g. TJ (III. v) "deficient in outward Tokens of
Respect" (p. 133); (III. vi) "gave Tokens of that Gallantry of Temper" (p. 139); (XIII. x)
"showed . . . the utmost Tokens of Surprize" (p. 727); (XVII. ii) "gave Tokens of Submission"
(p. 879); Am (I. vii) "I gave him too undeniable Tokens [of infatuation]" (p. 51);
(II. vi) "gave the strongest Tokens of Amazement" (p. 85). —R
"the Daring and Tremendous": In his literary criticism HF liked to propose terms
for generic types by placing the definite article before an adjective, thus making it into a
substantive: e.g. "the Ridiculous," and "the Monstrous" (JA Preface); "the Marvellous"
(TJ VIII. i). Here the terms characterizing the "modern Critic," who "glares horribly terrific,"
freezing "the young Author's Blood," suggest Pope's characterization of John Dennis
(1657-1734) in the Essay on Criticism (1711): "Appius reddens at each Word you speak, /
And stares, Tremendous! with a threatning Eye, / Like some fierce Tyrant in Old Tapestry!"
(TE, ll. 585-587). From the Preface and notes to The Tragedy of Tragedies (1731), where
Dennis is ridiculed as hidebound and priggish, to CGJ (9 June 1752), where he is referred
to as being "of acutely austere Memory" (p. 258), Dennis might well be thought to represent
for HF the very type of the "modern Critic."
"pert and sanguine": HF was fond of both these words. C-H lists 10 occurrences
of "pert/pertly/pertness" in the fiction—e.g. Sh "as pertly as I could," "pert again" (p.
311); "the pert Jade" (p. 339); JA (I. ix); "answered . . . very pertly"; (IV. i) "whom no
Pertness could make her Mistress . . . part with" (p. 280); TJ (II. iii) "very pert and obstinate"
(p. 85); (IV. xiii) "would be Pertness in a Woman" (p. 202); (XVII. iii) "Pertness, or
what is called Repartee" (p. 882); Am (IV. vi) "answered pertly enough" (p. 178). Especially
relevant in the present context is CGJ (19 May 1752), "A TREATISE on the Confident
and Pert, A modern Improvement in Writing" (pp. 231-233, continued pp. 255-259).
—For "sanguine" C-H also lists 10 instances in the fiction—e.g. in TJ "sanguine" modifies
"Expectations" (p. 106); "Assurance" (p. 221); "Friend" (p. 440); "Temper" and "Disposition
of Mind" (p. 708); in Am, "Temper" (pp. 163, 499); "Persons" (p. 289); "Hopes" (p. 368).
Also JVL "sanguine hopes" (pp. 19, 45). —R
"freezes the young Author's Blood": Cf. TJ (XI. vi) "These Words almost froze up
the Blood of Sophia" (p. 593). —R
"the Sound of his Voice . . . furious and wild Commotion": Cf. Pope's complaint
in the Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot (1734/35), recalling Dennis's attacks on his early poetry:
"Yet then did Dennis rave in furious fret" (TE, l. 153).
"Phænomena": Cf. TJ (VII. xiii) "often attended with worse Phænomena" (p. 380);
Am (I. i) "all the ordinary Phenomena" (p. 16); JVL "so extraordinary a phænomenon"
(p. 50). —R
"iron Strength of Lungs"; Cf. Am (XII. vi) "one of the sturdiest and forwardest
of the Mob . . . who by a superior Strength of Body, and of Lungs, presided" (p. 519).
"obviate": C-H cites 5 occurrences of "obviate" in HF's fiction: JA (III. i) "to
obviate some Constructions" (p. 188); TJ (III. iv) "to obviate some Misconstructions" (p.
128); (XI. i) "Criticism I here intend to obviate" (p. 569); (XII. i) "to obviate all such
Imputations" (p. 620); Am (Dedication) "to obviate any Criticisms" (p. 3). Also JVL "to
obviate some censures" (p. 11).
"the Science of Criticism": Cf. TJ (IX. i) "all the Arts and Sciences (even Criticism
itself" (p. 489).
"have not . . . duly reflected on": Cf. TJ (IX. v) "hath duly reflected on these many
Charms" (p. 510). —R
"discharge the Province": HF often uses this geographical metaphor to refer to
prescribed responsibilities, spheres of intellectual endeavor, or mental faculties. See JA
(Preface) "within its proper Province" (p. 6); "The Ridiculous only . . . falls within my
Province" (p. 7); (III. iv) "my Beer, which falls to my Province" (p. 227); TJ (II. i) "Founder
of a new Province of Writing" (p. 77); (II. iv) "it is our Province to relate Facts" (p. 87); (IX. i)
"the undisputed Province of Judgment" (p. 491); (XIV. i) "a Writer whose Province is Comedy"
(p. 743); (XVI. vi) "within the Province of Cunning" (p. 859). —R
"execute that Task": C-H cites 82 instances in HF's fiction alone of "execute," the
great majority in this sense of "to carry out, accomplish."
"Character . . . is supported": Cf. TJ (III. vi) "Persons of such Characters as were
supported by Thwackum" (p. 137). —R
"Mechanical Operations": The phrase evokes two of HF's favorite comic authors:
Samuel Butler in Hudibras (1680), III. i. 1497-8: "The Tools of working out Salvation /
By meer Mechanick Operation" (ed. John Wilders [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967], p. 231);
and Jonathan Swift in The Mechanical Operation of the Spirit (1704), in which Swift ironically
explains things spiritual in terms of mechanistic bodily functions. The author of the
present essay has proceeded in this same vein, insisting that literary and intellectual faculties
are proportionable to bodily height and stature.
| Studies in bibliography | |