Such were Aristotle, Horace, and
Longinus, among the antients, Dacier and Bossu among the French, and
some perhaps among us; who have certainly been duly authorized to
execute at least a judicial authority in foro literario.
But without ascertaining all the proper qualifications of a
critic, which I have touched on elsewhere, I think I may very boldly
object to the censures of any one past upon works which he hath not
himself read. Such censurers as these, whether they speak from their
own guess or suspicion, or from the report and opinion of others,
may properly be said to slander the reputation of the book they
condemn.
Such may likewise be suspected of deserving this character, who,
without assigning any particular faults, condemn the whole in
general defamatory terms; such as vile, dull, d--d stuff, &c., and
particularly by the use of the monosyllable low; a word which
becomes the mouth of no critic who is not RIGHT HONOURABLE.
Again, though there may be some faults justly assigned in the
work, yet, if those are not in the most essential parts, or if they
are compensated by greater beauties, it will savour rather of the
malice of a slanderer than of the judgment of a true critic to pass
a severe sentence upon the whole, merely on account of some vicious
part. This is directly contrary to the sentiments of Horace:
Verum ubi plura nitent in carmine, non ego paucis
Offendor maculis, quas aut incuria fudit,
Aut humana parum cavit natura--
But where the beauties, more in number, shine,
I am not angry, when a casual line
(That with some trivial faults unequal flows)
A careless hand or human frailty shows.
Pages:
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693