translatable.

Another indication of the essential difference between the two kinds of composition, and of the superior importance of the expression in Poetry, is, that a good translation of Poetry not a Poem, (though, perhaps, strictly speaking, what is so called is rather an imitatim,) is read by one well-acquainted with the original, with equal or even superior pleasure to that which it affords to one ignorant of that original; whereas the best translation of a Prose-work, (at least of one not principally valued for beauty of style,) will seldom be read by one familiar with the original. And for the same reason, a fine passage of Poetry will be reperused, with unabated pleasure, for the twentieth time, even by one who knows it by heart."

According to the views here taken, good Poetry might be defined, Elegant and decorated language, in metre, expressing such and such thoughts:" and good Prose-composition, such and such thoughts expressed in good language:" that which is primary in each, being subordinate in the other.

§ 4.

Analogy be

tween Prose and Poetry, Walking and Dancing,

Speaking

and Singing.

What has been said may be illustrated as fully, not, as it might be, but as is suitable to the present occasion, by the following passages from Dr. A. Smith's admirable frag ment of an 66 Essay on the Imitative Arts :"-" Were I to attempt to discriminate between Dancing and any other kind of movement, I should observe, that though in performing any ordinary action,-in walking, for example, across the room, a person may manifest both grace and agility, yet if he betrays the least intention of showing either, he is sure of offending more or less, and we never fail to accuse him of some degree of vanity and affectation. In the performance of any such ordinary action, every one wishes to appear to be solely occupied about the proper purpose of the action; if he means to show either grace or agility, he is careful to conceal that meaning; and in proportion as he betrays it, which he almost always does, he offends. In Dancing, on the contrary, every one professes and avows, as it were, the intention of displaying some degree either of grace or of agility, or of both. The display of one or other, or both of these qualities, is, in reality, the proper purpose of the action; and there can never be any disagreeable vanity or affectation in following out the proper purpose of any action. When we say of any particular person, that he gives himself many affected airs and graces in Dancing, we mean either that he exhibits airs and graces unsuitable to

80 And accordingly it should be observed, that, as all admit, none but a poet can be qualified to translate a poem.

81 Hence it is that the want of complete Perspicuity (such i. e. as puts the reader instantly in possession of the whole sense) is a far eBS

fault in Poetry than in Prose. For Poetry, if it be worth reading at all, is worth reading over and over; which it will be, if it be sufficiently intelligible, on a first perusal, to excite vivid a pleasing emotions.

the nature of the Dance, or that he exaggerates those which are suitable. Every Dance is, in reality, a succession of airs and graces of some kind or other, which, if I may say so, profess themselves to be such. The steps, gestures, and motions which, as it were, avow the intention of exhibiting a succession of such airs and graces, are the steps, gestures, and motions which are peculiar to Dancing. The distinction between the sounds or tones of Singing, and those of Speaking, seems to be of the same kind with that between the steps, &c., of Dancing, and those of any other ordinary action. Though in Speaking a person may show a very agreeable tone of voice, yet if he seems to intend to show it,-if he appears to listen to the sound of his own voice, and as it were to tune it into a pleasing modulation, he never fails to offend, as guilty of a most disagreeable affectation. In Speaking, as in every other ordinary action, we expect and require that the speaker should attend only to the proper purpose of the action, the clear and distinct expression of what he has to say. In Singing, on the contrary, every one professes the intention to please by the tone and cadence of his voice; and he not only appears to be guilty of no disagreeable affectation in doing so, but we expect and require that he should do so. To please by the Choice and Arrangement of agreeable sounds, is the proper purpose of all music, vocal as well as instrumental; and we always expect that every one should attend to the proper purpose of whatever action he is performing. A person may appear to sing, as well as to dance, affectedly; he may endeavor to please by sounds and tones which are unsuitable to the nature of the song, or he may dwell too much on those which are suitable to it. The disagreeable affectation appears to consist always, not in attempting to please by a proper, but by some improper modulation of the voice."

It is only necessary to add, (what seems evidently to have been in the author's mind, though the Dissertation is left unfinished,) that Poetry has the same relation to Prose, as Dancing to Walking, and Singing to Speaking; and that what has been said of them, will apply exactly, mutatis mutandis, to the other. It is needless to state this at length; as any one, by going over the passages just cited, merely substituting for "Singing," "Poetry," for "Speaking," Prose," for "Voice," "Language," &c., will at once perceive the coincidence.82

What has been said will not be thought an unnecessary digression, by any one who considers (not to mention the direct application of Dr. Smith's remarks, to Elocution) the important principle thus established in respect of the decorations of style: viz. that though it is possible for a poetical style to be affectedly and offensively ornamented, yet the same degree and kind of decoration which is not

82 This probably was in Aristotle's mind when he reckoned Poetry among the imitative arts; viz. that it is imitative of Prose-composi

tion, in the same manner as Singing, of ordinary Speaking; and Dancing, of ordinary action.

only allowed, but required, in Verse, would in Prose be disgusting; and that the appearance of attention to the Beauty of the expression, and to the Arrangement of the words, which in Verse is essential, is to be carefully avoided in Prose.

Elegance of style in prose not to be thought of during the act of writing.

And since, as Dr. Smith observes, "such a design, when it exists, is almost always betrayed;" the safest rule is, never, during the act of composition, to study Elegance, or think about it at all. Let an author study the best models-mark their beauties of style, and dwell upon them, that he may insensibly catch the habit of expressing himself with Elegance; and when he has completed any composition, he may revise it, and cautiously alter any passage that is awkward and harsh, as well as those that are feeble and obscure : but let him never, while writing, think of any beauties of style; but content himself with such as may occur spontaneously. He should carefully study Perspicuity as he goes along; he may also, though more cautiously, aim, in like manner, at Energy; but if he is endeavouring after Elegance, he will hardly fail to betray that endeavour; and in proportion as he does this, he will be so far from giving pleasure, to good judges, that he will offend more than by the rudest simplicity.

1 ART IV.

OF ELOCUTION.

CHAP. I.-General Considerations relative to Elocution

§ 1.

On the importance of this branch, it is hardly necessary to offer any remark. Few need to be told that the effect of the most perfect composition may be entirely destroyed, even by a Delivery which does not render it unintelligible; that one, which is inferior both in matter and style, may produce, if better spoken, a more powerful effect than another which surpasses it in both those points; and that even such an Elocution as does not spoil the effect of what is said, may yet fall far short of doing full justice to it. "What would you have said," observed Æschines, when his recital of his great rival's celebrated Speech on the Crown was received with a burst of admiration," what would you have said, had you heard him speak it ?"

The subject is far from having failed to engage attention. Of the prevailing deficiency of this, more than of any other qualification of a perfect Orator, many have complained; and several have laboured to remove it but it may safely be asserted, that their endeavours have been, at the very best, entirely unsuccessful. Probably not a single instance could be found of any one who has attained; by the study of any system of instruction that has hitherto appeared, a really good Delivery; but there are many,—probably nearly as many as have fully tried the experiment, who have by this means been totally spoiled; who have fallen irrecoverably into an affected style of spouting, worse, in all respects, than their original mode of Delivery. Many accordingly have, not unreasonably, conceived a disgust for the subject altogether; considering it hopeless that Elocution should be taught by any rules; and acquiescing in the conclusion that it is to be regarded as entirely a gift of nature, or an accidental acquirement of practice.

It is to counteract the prejudice which may result from these feelings, that I have thought it needful to profess in the outset a dissent from the principles generally adopted, and to lay claim to

some degree of originality in my own. Novelty affords at least an opening for hope; and the only opening, when former attempts have met with total failure.'

8 2.

Elocution.

The requisites of Elocution correspond in great measure with those of Style: Correct Enunciation, in opposition both to indistinct utterance, and to vulgar and provincial pro- Requisites of nunciation, may be considered as answering to Purity, Grammatical Propriety, and absence of Obsolete or otherwise Unintelligible words. These qualities, of Style, and of Elocution, being equally required in common conversation, do not fall within the proper province of Rhetoric. The three qualities, again, which have been treated of, under the head of Style, viz. Perspicuity, Energy, and Elegance, may be regarded as equally requisites of Elocution; which, in order to be perfect, must convey the meaning clearly, for cibly, and agreeably.

Reading and
Speaking.

Before, however, I enter upon any separate examination of these requisites, it will be necessary to premise a few remarks on the distinction between the two branches of Delivery; viz., Reading aloud, and Speaking. The object of correct Reading is, to convey to the hearers, through the medium of the ear, what is conveyed to the reader by the eye;—to put them in the same situation with him who has the book before him; -to exhibit to them, in short, by the voice, not only each word, but also all the stops, paragraphs, italic characters, notes of interrogation, &c., which his sight presents to him. His voice seems to indicate to them," thus and thus it is written in the book or manuscript before me."

2

Impressive reading superadds to this, some degree of adaptation of the tones of voice to the character of the subject, and of the style.

Impressive
Reading.

What is often termed fine Reading seems to convey, in addition to these, a kind of admonition to the hearers respecting the feelings which the composition ought to excite in them: it ap

1 This is, in substance, one of Bacon's Aphorisms.

2 It may be said, indeed, that even tolerable Reading aloud, supplies more than is exhibited by a book to the eye; since though italics, e.g., indicate which word is to receive the emphasis, they do not point out the tone in which it is to be pronounced; which may be essential even to the right understanding of the sentence. E. G., in such a sentence as in Genesis i. "God said, Let there be light; and there was light:" here we can indicate indeed to the eye that the stress is to be 66 upon 2018 ;" but it may be pronounced in different tones; one of which would alter the sese, by implying that there was light already.

This is true indeed; and it is also true, that the very words themselves are not always presented to the eye with the same distinctions as are to be conveyed to the ear; as, e. g. "abuse," "refuse," "project," and many others, are pronounced differently, as nouns and as verbs. This ambiguity, however, in our written signs, as well as the other, relative to the emphatic words, are imperfections which will not mislead a moderately practised reader. My meaning, in saying that such Reading as I am speaking of puts the hearers in the same situation as if the book were before them, is to be understood on the supposition of their being able not only to read, but to read so as to take in the full sense of what is written.