[351] De Art. Poet. ℣ 180.
[352] Hor. De Art. Poet. ℣ 3.
[353] Instit. Poet L. II. c. 7.
[354] Virg. Eclog. VII. ℣ 5.
[355] And yet it seems to be an agreed Point among many of the Learned,
that the Plays of the Ancients were acted in a Kind of Recitative set
to the Flute. See this proved by _Crusius_, in his Lives of the _Roman_
Poets, in the Introduction to Dramatic Poets, § IV. Dr. _Bentley_, in
his Preface to _Terence_, takes it for granted. See, likewise, _Cic.
ad. Brutum_, § 55. The Objections which Dr. _Trapp_ makes against it,
would hold, in some Degree, against Chanting: And perhaps both may be
accounted for, from the same prudential Reason, _viz._ That the Voice,
when continued for some Time very elevated, naturally falls into a Tone,
and yet it was necessary it should be very elevated in the ancient
Theatre, which was very large, as well as in Cathedrals. To prevent the
Disagreeableness of this, it was regulated by a sort of Music.
[356] Hor. De Art. Poet. ℣ 322.
[357] Juv. Sat. III.
[358] Æn. L. VI.
[359] Juv. Sat. III.
[360] Lib. II. c. II.
[361] L. II ℣ 380.
[362] ℣ 139,--℣ 155.
[363] De Art. Poet. ℣ 126.
[364] The forecited Author, Mr. _Crusius_, thinks them to have been of
great Use and Expediency to the Ancients; "Their Stage being very large,
and their Plays acted by Day-light, the natural Features of the Face, at
such a Distance, and without the Help of false Lights, could not appear
distinguishable enough, to express the several Characters. Besides
the adapting Masks to each Character, very much contributed to the
Entertainment of the Audience; since hereby they could better imagine
they saw the Persons represented in the Play, than we can, who are still
apt to lose the Character in the Player; not to mention this other
Disadvantage of the same Face appearing in the different Characters of
Prince and Pimp, Hero and Villain, old and young." _Ibid._ Sect. III. So
that what they lost in expressing the Variety of Passion, they gain'd in
the Variety of Character.
[365] De Art. Poet. ℣ 23.
[366] ℣ 99.
[367] ℣ 112.
[368] _Shakespear._
[369] Horat. ad Aug. ℣ 166.
[370] De Art. Poet. ℣ 131.
[371] ℣ 119.
[372] _John_ Earl of _Rochester_.
[373] _Nat. Lec._
[374] ℣ 125.
[375] ℣ 128.
[376] _Materiam vulgarem, notam, & e medio petitam._ But _Roscommon_
above, and, I think, most of the Commentators, make _communia_ to be
the same with what follows, _ignota indictaque_, i.e. _common_, till
you took them, such as were no-body's Property before. In this Sense,
_Horace_, as Dr. _Trapp_ says, contradicts his Opinion of new Subjects
being better than old.
[377] Ad Aug. ℣ 213.
[378] Lib. I. Ep. I. 32.
[379] De Art. Poet. ℣ 31.
[380] ℣ 179.
[381] Besides, in the ancient Tragedy the Chorus justified Soliloquies,
who were supposed to be humane By-standers, where the Scene was laid:
Among the Rules given to the Chorus in _Horace_, one is, that they
should keep secret what they heard, _Ille tegat commissa_, Ar. Poet.
℣ 200.
[382] Instit. Poet. Lib. II. cap. 5.
[383] De Arte Poet. ℣ 192.
[384] Instit. Poet. Lib. II. c. 5.
[385] De Art. Poet. ℣ 189.
[386] Inst. Poet. L. II. c. 5.
[387] Inst. Poet. L. II. p. 24.
[388] Nor, with Submission, does _Vossius_ suppose them inconsistent.
[389] Poet. L. I. c. 9.
[390] Inst. Poet. L. II. c. 5.
[391] Auctio Davisiana.
[392] Poet. L. I. c. 9.
LECTURE XXIII, _&c._
_Of_ COMEDY.
Having discours'd of the Nature and Genius of the Drama in general;
the three great Unities, _viz_. of _Action_, _Time_, and _Place_;
the Variety and Distinctness of the Characters; the Contrivance and
Management of the Plot, and other Things of that Sort; Comedy comes next
to be consider'd separately, as it falls under the general Rules of the
_Drama_ which are already mention'd, and as it is distinguish'd from
Tragedy, which shall be treated of hereafter.
The Word _Comedy_ is deriv'd from Κωμη, _a Village_, and
ωδη, _a Song_; because, consisting only of a _Chorus_, and
fram'd without Dialogue or Diversity of Characters, it was sung
originally in _Villages_, and was therefore call'd a _Country Catch_;
its first Appearance being entirely different from that Dress, which
it afterwards assum'd, and still continues to wear: Or it was call'd
Comedy from κωμος and ωδη, because at Feasts (which
were under the Care of the God _Comus_) it was usually one Part of the
Entertainment.
When or where _Comic_ Poetry had its Original, is a Question not to be
determin'd, which _Aristotle_ accounts for in this Manner;[393]
Αι μεν ουν της τραγωδιας μεταβασεις, και δι' ὡν εγενοντο, ου
λεληθασιν. Ἡ δε κωμωδια, δια το μη σπουδαζεσθαι εξ αρχης, ελαθεν.
_We are acquainted_ (says he) _with the Alterations and Improvements
made in Tragedy, and with the Authors of them; but Comedy, because
less Regard was paid to it at first, we know little or nothing of_.
The Dignity of Tragic Poetry was the Reason why the _Greeks_ began to
improve it much earlier, and to take more Pains in it, and therefore its
Rise and Progress is much better known. But altho' Tragedy was sooner
refin'd, and brought under the Rules of Art, yet it is probable, that
some rude Attempts in Comedy were more ancient: Because it seems natural
to imagine, that Mankind, upon gathering in the Fruits of the Earth,
and receiving the other Blessings of Providence, should be excited with
Sentiments of Joy, affected with an innocent Gaiety, and led on to some
festival Sports, before they could think of writing Poems upon the
Miseries and Misfortunes of other Men; and because a Life plain, and
without Shew, was more ancient than State and Magnificence[394].
Before I divide my Subject, I shou'd now, according to the Rules of
Method, define it, which I wou'd comply with, if the several Parts of
it wou'd properly fall under any one Definition, that wou'd equally
extend to all of them. But as there were three Sorts of Comedy, and the
Definition, which I propose to give, takes in only the two last and best
of them, which are now in Use, it may be proper to observe, before I
offer any Definition, that these three Sorts of Comedy were the _Old_,
the _Middle_, and the _New_.
The _old_ was of two Kinds, 1. There was the very oldest of all, of
which not the least Remains are now left; but the Writers of it, as
_Aristotle_ tells us, were _Epicharmus_ and _Phormis_, _Sicilians_; and
_Crates_ the _Athenian_. Their Performances were rough and artless,
innocent and sententious. 2. There was, what we now more expresly call
the _old_ Comedy; the Masters in which were _Eupolis_ and _Cratinus_,
whose Works are lost, and _Aristophanes_, who was the last in that Way
of Writing. It was sharp, and satirical, and extremely abusive; even Men
of the first Rank, whether the Facts were true or false, if they were
suspected only of any criminal Behaviour, were brought upon the Stage
without any Disguise, call'd by their own Names, and us'd as severely as
possible. This is what _Horace_ alludes to in one of his Satires:
_Eupolis, atque Cratinus, Aristophanesque Poëtæ,
Atque alii, quorum Comœdia prisca virorum est,
Si quis dignus erat describi, quod malus, aut fur,
Aut mœchus foret, aut sicarius, aut alioqui
Famosus, multa cum libertate notabant._
_Cratin_ and _Eupolis_, that lash'd the Age,
Those old Comedian Furies of the Stage;
If they were to describe a vile, unjust,
And cheating Knave, or scourge a lawless Lust,
Or other Crimes; regardless of his Fame,
They shew'd the Man, and boldly told his Name.
_Creech._
_Dignus erat describi_, deserv'd to be expos'd, _i. e._ in the Poet's
Opinion; for we are not to imagine, that all Persons who underwent that
theatrical Discipline, did really deserve it: It is well known, how ill
_Aristophanes_ us'd the very best of the _Athenians_, the almost divine
_Socrates_. Besides, it might, and probably did often happen, that a Man
who had in Justice deserv'd Correction, might be too much a Sufferer
in the Measure of it. But, however, to point its Satire in plain Terms
against the greatest Men, and the greatest Crimes, was a Liberty which
this old Comedy assum'd; an unreasonable Liberty upon all Accounts,
and not to be endur'd. For Men of the first Rank, and Crimes of the
blackest Die, are not the proper Characters or Objects of Comedy, as
will be shewn more at large hereafter: And in writing Satire directly
to name Men, whatsoever Rank they are of, is inconsistent with all the
sober Rules of Poetry: As, in the Comedy of the _Clouds_, _Aristophanes_
brings _Socrates_ upon the Stage by Name, as one of the Persons of the
_Drama_. Indeed, this Liberty of Abuse and Defamation, was allow'd
chiefly to the _Chorus_, and was most in Use during the Democracy of the
_Athenians_, especially in the Time of the _Peloponnesian_ War. But when
the Thirty Tyrants had seiz'd the Government, they thought proper to
make a Law against it. This _Horace_ speaks of, in his Art of Poetry:
_Successit vetus his Comœdia, non sine multa
Laude; sed in vitium libertas excidit, & vim
Dignam lege regi; Lex est accepta, Chorusque
Turpiter obticuit, sublato jure nocendi._
Next these, old Comedy did please the Age,
But soon their Liberty was turn'd to Rage;
Such Rage, as Civil Pow'r was forc'd to tame,
And by good Laws secure Men's injur'd Fame.
Thus was the _Chorus_ lost, their railing Muse
Grew silent, when forbidden to abuse.
_Creech._
The most learned _Gerrard Vossius_ has oblig'd us with so good an
Account of the Rise and Progress of the two other Sorts of Comedy, I
mentioned, that I am capable of giving it no Improvements; it is as
follows: [397]"The Government, for fear of being too freely us'd, took
away the Chorus, which was generally extreamly abusive. Instead of it,
succeeded παρεκβασεις, or Digressions, which, like the old
_Chorus_, were Breaks in the Action, but design'd chiefly to censure
or expose the Poets: If any other Persons were struck at, it was not
done rudely, but in a modest and decent Manner. The Vices of all the
Citizens, were, without Exception, brought under the Lash, but no Body
was nam'd: Or if any particular Person was pointed at, it was covertly,
and in Disguise. And this Sort of Comedy, after the third was invented,
was call'd the _Middle_ Comedy; introduc'd between the Old and New, but
had a greater Resemblance with the Old. The most celebrated Authors of
this Middle Comedy at _Athens_, were _Philiseus_ and _Stephanus_; as is
mention'd in the _Prolegomena_ to _Aristophanes_. It was a Rule with
them to name no Body, but Gentlemen of their own Profession; a Liberty
which others were very willing to allow them: In this, alone, they
follow'd the Old Comedy, which did the same Thing." Most, if not all
the modern Comedies, are of this Sort, except in the last Particular,
especially those of our own Country; as will be very evident, from
what we have to offer upon this Subject hereafter. Such, then, was the
_Middle_ Comedy, and was succeeded by the _New_, which we have the
History of from the same Hand.
"Afterwards, in the Reign of _Alexander the Great_, to expose the Vices
of great Men, even without naming them, was look'd upon as an Offence
to the Government. Comedy, by this Means, entirely lost its ancient
Privilege of Correction, and a new Way of Writing was introduc'd, to
work up an imaginary Story, and instead of _Chorus's_, or _Digressions_,
to make Use of Prologues." _Vossius_ then gives us a long Account of
the Writers of this new Comedy, which we don't think proper to repeat;
and observes, "That _Menander_'s Character was universally allow'd to
be superior to all of them. In these Comedies the Liberty of Scandal,
and all the Bitterness of Abuse, was in great Measure laid aside:
The _Chorus_ (as before observ'd) was entirely dropp'd, and the new
Invention, _Prologue_, now succeeded. Comedy, at its first Appearance,
was nothing else but a _Chorus_; afterwards, Variety of Persons and
Characters were introduc'd, and the _Chorus_ taken away: So that it
was first of all a _Chorus_ only, without Dialogue; and then Dialogue,
without a _Chorus_. This new Comedy differ'd very much from the old;
the Plots in the old Comedy were chiefly taken from real Stories,
in this always from fictitious ones; that was abusive, this had its
pointed Satire, but no scandalous and unmannerly Reflections. Nor were
the Parts of it divided in the same Manner, or into the same Number of
Acts. There was a great Variety of Measures in the old Comedy, but only
_Trochaic_, or _Iambic_, in the new: And, lastly, the Style of this
was more correct and elegant than the old, whose Language, as it was
more elevated, so was it less regular and uniform." This new Comedy was
the only Sort that ever appear'd upon the _Roman_ Stage, introduc'd
thither by _Livius Andronicus_, the Author of Dramatic Poetry among
the _Romans_. _Plautus_ and _Terence_ proceeded upon the same Plan,
especially _Terence_; for _Plautus_'s Way of Writing has a greater
Resemblance of the _Middle_ Comedy. And therefore, tho' _Aristophanes_,
considering when he liv'd, and the Nature of his Poetry, was so much,
and so justly celebrated; yet, rejecting utterly the old Comedy, the two
last Sorts are such only as ought to be included in the general Idea of
Comic Poetry: Or, perhaps, by uniting both the last together, a just
Notion of Comedy may be better form'd, which, I think, may be defin'd in
this Manner: _Comedy is a Sort of Dramatic Poetry, which gives a View of
common and private Life, recommends Virtue, and exposes the Vices and
Follies of Mankind in a humorous and merry Way of Writing_.
This Idea of Comedy, is what arises rather from joining both Sorts
together, than what properly belongs to either of them: For neither,
taken separately, come up to it. Virtue had not its just Commendation in
the _Middle_ Comedy, nor Vice its due Correction in the _New_: There was
too much Mirth in one, and Gravity in the other. This, therefore, is the
Definition of a perfect Comedy, not as it _always_, or indeed _generally
is_, but as it is _sometimes_, and _always ought_ to be. "Comedy (says
_Vossius_) is divided by some _Greek_ and _Roman_ Criticks into the
_Moral_ and the _Merry_: The first gives a natural and sober View of
common Life; the other is all over Pleasantry and Ridicule." And this
was undoubtedly a very convenient Division, because it takes the Case
as it really is. Of the first Kind, are _Terence_'s Comedies, of the
last _Plautus_'s: But both of them had been more perfect, if they had
fallen a little more into each other's Way of Writing; if _Terence_ had
endeavour'd more to make us laugh, and _Plautus_ to be more serious.
Comedy is defin'd by _Scaliger_[398], to be _a Dramatic Poem,
representing the Business of Life, whose Event is fortunate, and Style
familiar_. But to represent the Business of Life, belongs to the
_Drama_ in general, and may equally be applied to Tragedy or Comedy;
and therefore ought not to make Part of the distinguishing Character of
either of them. Comedy, indeed, ought always to end fortunately, and the
Style should be familiar: But both these are included under that Branch
of our Definition which says, it must be _in a humorous or facetious Way
of Writing_. Mirth and Raillery, tho' essential to this Sort of Poetry,
are not taken Notice of in _Scaliger_'s Definition, and, in _Vossius_'s
Opinion[399], are not at all necessary in the Idea of it. But is it
possible to have any Notion of Comedy, where Mirth and Humour have no
Place in it? _Scaliger_ says, in another Place[400], tho' not very
consistently, that it was common, both in Tragedy and Comedy, to have
the Play sometimes _conclude with a Mixture of Grief and Gladness_. He
seems to have forgot his own Definition of Comedy, where he would have
it always _end successfully_. He mentions, indeed, many Comedies[401],
_where there it a Mixture of Mirth and Sorrow in them_; and the
Observation might have been as true of all the rest. For it is scarce,
if at all possible, that all the Persons concern'd in an Action should
rejoice in the most fortunate and successful Conclusion of it; because,
where-ever any Emulation or Competition rises, it is impossible that
every Body should succeed: And were it possible, it would be improper;
for Vice should always receive its Punishment, and Virtue its Reward.
It is therefore to no Purpose to give us the Instances of _Thraso_ in
_Terence_'s _Eunuch_, of _Chremes_ in his _Phormio_, or of others, who
at the End of the Play go off in some Concern. For (not to observe that
their Sorrow is very much soften'd in the Conclusion) to make the Event
prosperous, it is enough, that in general, and in the main Point, it
turns out successfully, and that all the Audience, tho' not all the
Persons concern'd in the Action, are dismiss'd in good Humour. What
_Scaliger_ says of Tragedies, (which we shall speak of hereafter) is
very true, that the _Catastrophe_ neither is, nor always ought to be
unfortunate. But certainly a Comedy ought always to end chearfully.
And this may serve, by way of Answer, to what _Vossius_ has observ'd
about the double _Catastrophe_ of some Comedies, which, with regard to
different Persons, _are joyful and unfortunate_[402].
_Vossius_ defines Comedy in this Manner,[403]_A Dramatic Poem, copying
the Actions of the principal Citizens, and common People, in a familiar
Style, not without Mirth and Raillery_. He therefore manifestly
contradicts[404] himself, when he affirms, afterwards, that Mirth is
not _essential to Comedy_. Having given us this Definition, he proceeds
thus: "But if we consider Comedy, as it _has generally been_ written, we
might call it, _a Representation not only of public, but private Life_."
Yes, truly, if we consider Comedy as it _ought to_ be written, we may
venture to say, that it is a Copy of the Actions of _private Men_, and
not of the chief _Magistrates_. For by the Actions of the _principal
Citizens_[405] he means (as it appears plainly afterwards) those, who
are concern'd in the Government, and in the Administration of Public
Affairs, which are by no Means a proper Subject for Comedy.
[Sidenote: _Twenty-fourth Lecture._]
But we said Comedy was a View of _common and private Life_: Not
that the lower Sort of People only are to be represented in it; for
Gentlemen, and even Nobility, not only may, but ought sometimes to be
introduc'd, if they do not appear in a public Character; but by no Means
Princes, or Monarchs, or even Persons of lower Station in Government,
as concern'd in public Affairs; Circumstances which are proper for
Tragedy, not at all for Comedy. Much less should a Deity be introduc'd;
for which Reason, _Aristophanes_, in his _Plutus_, and _Plautus_, in
his _Amphitryo_, break thro' the Rules of Comic Poetry, by bringing
_Jupiter_ and _Mercury_, and other Deities, upon the Stage. There is,
indeed, as Comedy has been manag'd, two Sorts of it, the _Genteel_,
and the _Low_; the one consisting of Persons of Character and inferior
Life both together; the other of the Vulgar only; and is not properly
Comedy, but Farce, nor so suitable to my Definition of it. For this
gives a View but of _one Side_ of private Life, and that the least
creditable. Nor yet are Persons of Condition only to be represented,
because we should still see but _one_, tho' the better Side of Life; and
because by this Means we should want Mirth and Raillery, and the true
Comic Spirit; which are all best kept up by Persons of low Degree, or
rather by a mix'd Conversation between those of different Circumstances.
Thus _Terence_, who, in _Cæsar_'s Opinion, wanted somewhat of this _Vis
Comica_, would have had scarce any of it, if we had been entertain'd
only with the grave Appearance of his _Chremeses_ and _Simo's_,
_Phædria's_ and _Antipho's_; and all the lower Characters of _Davus_,
_Parmeno_, or _Geta_, and such merry Fellows had been omitted.
An Image of common and private Life takes in the Virtues, Vices,
and Follies of Mankind; and represents them in their true Colours;
Virtue as amiable, Vice as odious, and Folly as ridiculous. Nor does
this at all contradict their Definition of Comedy, which _Aristotle_
has given; where he seems to determine, that whatsoever is truly
valuable, and worthy of Commendation, is by no means a proper Subject
for Comedy.[406] Ἡ δε κωμωδια, εστιν, ὡσπερ ειπομεν, μιμησις φαυλοτερων
μεν, ου μεντοι κατα πασαν κακιαν, αλλα του αισχρου εστι το γελοιον
μοριον. _Comedy, as we said, is an Imitation of the worse Part
of Mankind, but not thro' all the Enormities of Vice; for it is only
some Degree of it that is ridiculous._ In this Definition, _Aristotle_,
according to his usual Manner, gives a short and succinct Account
of his Subject, not a full and perfect Explication of it. And I may
venture to say, that I have offer'd nothing that is inconsistent with
this Description, by affirming that _Virtue_, as well as _Vice_ and
_Folly_, is a proper Subject for Comedy. For when he tells us, that the
Characters in Comedy are to be copied from the more ignominious Part
of Mankind, he does not say, they are to be copied from them _only_:
Nor does he mean, that none else are to be represented in it, but that
none else are to be _expos'd_, and turn'd to _Ridicule_. And Vices will
always appear the more odious and ridiculous, when they are plac'd in
full Light against their opposite Virtues.
Mons. _Dacier_, who has given us a Translation, and Notes upon this
Part of _Aristotle_, affirms, that _Ridicule is the only Subject of
Comedy_[407]; which is neither true in Fact, nor agreeable to his
Author's Meaning. I am sensible that the _chief_ Business of Comedy is
Ridicule, but not the _only_ one. _Aristotle_ intimates, indeed, what we
not only grant, but contend for, that great and scandalous Enormities,
as they raise some Degree of Horror in our Minds, and are proper for
Tragedy, are not so for Comic Writers. But they may bring lesser
Failings upon the Stage, and perhaps some which are rather odious than
ridiculous: Nor does that great Philosopher advance any Thing to the
contrary: For in those Words, αλλα του αισχρου εστι το γελοιον μοριον,
he only shews, what we readily allow, that the _chief_ Subject
of Comedy is Ridicule: And he plainly insinuates, that scandalous and
great Crimes are not proper for it, when he defines it _an Imitation
of the worse Part of Mankind, but not practising every Kind of Vice_.
And yet Mons. _Dacier_ defends _Aristophanes_, and other Writers of the
old Comedy, who (as _Horace_ observes, in the Verses before mention'd)
expos'd the worst Sort of Crimes upon the Stage, tho' he insists, at the
same Time, that nothing is to be admitted in Comedy, but what is the
Subject of Ridicule. He attempts, indeed, to reconcile their Practice
with this Opinion, by observing, that those old Poets painted even the
greatest Enormities in that Light which made them rather ridiculous than
detestable, and that the Audience were to consider them only in that
View: But it is very evident, that horrid and abominable Vices (such
were some of those which _Horace_ mentions, and these Writers expos'd)
as Murder, for Instance, can by _no sort_ of Colouring be ridiculous,
nor, in the Nature of Things, become the Object of Jest and Merriment. I
own there may be some Circumstances attending the greatest Crimes, which
may excite rather Contempt or Laughter, than Horror or Detestation,
as may be observ'd in the Instances of _Theft_ and _Adultery_, which
_Horace_ mentions: Nor do I deny, that, _in this View_, they may
have a Place in Comedy, provided they are but seldom, and with great
Caution, represented: Tho', notwithstanding all the Caution that is
possible, they had better be omitted. For, upon _the whole_, all Things
consider'd, such Actions are shocking, and can never be so truly
ridiculous, as they are detestable. However, to let them make the most
of this Concession, it can never be admitted as an Excuse for those
Poets who represent Things and Persons as ridiculous, which are in no
Respect whatever the Objects of Ridicule. I mention Persons, as well
as Things: For Mons. _Dacier_ defends _Plautus_ for introducing Kings
and Gods upon the Stage in his _Amphitryo_, and yet, notwithstanding,
pronounces it to be true Comedy, for this Reason, forsooth, because
_the Subject_ (says he) _in itself tragical, is by the Poet turn'd into
Ridicule_. Which is so far from being a just Vindication of him, that it
is the very Fault he stands accus'd of. For what is this, but inverting
the very Nature of Things? It is not _Poetry_, but _Buffoonry_; nor can
the Author of such Dramatic Performances be consider'd as a _Poet_,
but a _Droll_. Such Prodigies may possibly occasion a Laugh among the
Vulgar, who think nothing _marvellous_, but what is _monstrous_; but
Men of Taste, and Judgment, will always treat them with Contempt and
Aversion. To return, then, from Persons to Things. If we restrain
Comedy from meddling with enormous Vices, do we not seem to contradict
_Horace_'s Judgment, who says,
[408]----_Ridiculum acri
Fortius & melius magnas plerumque secat res:
Illi, scripta quibus Comœdia prisca viris est,
Hoc stabant, hoc sunt imitandi._
Great Faults are rounded off with oily Sneer,
Not mall'able by Strokes the most severe.
This was the Drift of all those ancient Plays,
In this they may be follow'd, and with Praise.
_Great_ Faults may, I own, but not the _greatest_: _Follies_ the
greatest, if you will, and sometimes great _Crimes_, which (as was
observ'd before) may have something ridiculous in the Manner of their
Commission. Nor did the Writers of the old Comedy _always_ expose
the greatest Crimes, but Crimes of a less Note, and Follies of the
first Magnitude, and are in _this Respect worthy of Imitation_. But
notwithstanding the ingenious and refin'd Observations of the _French_
Translator, _Aristotle_'s Rule will for ever stand in Opposition to his
Sentiments, and exclude such abominable Characters from being introduc'd
in Comedy, under Pretence of exposing them.[409] Το γαρ γελοιον
εστιν αμαρτημα τι, και αισχ ανωδυνον, και ου φθαρτικον. Οιον, ευθυς,
το γελοιον προσωπον αισχρον τι, και διεστραμμενον ανευ οδυνης.
_What we laugh at, is only lesser Failings, some Immorality that is not
shocking, and attended with no fatal Consequences: As, to use an obvious
Instance, a ridiculous Face is ugly, and ill-shap'd, but without any
Appearance of Calamity._ And is this Description of Ridicule ever to
be reconcil'd with the most heinous Crimes, such as the Writers of the
old Comedy have sometimes expos'd? Do such black Offences affect us
with no Sorrow; are no fatal Consequences occasion'd by them? I don't
then plead the Practice of these Poets against _Aristotle_'s Opinion,
(which yet is a Difficulty Mons. _Dacier_ endeavours to guard against)
but from the Nature and Reason of the Thing I arraign their Practice:
Tho' were the Point to be decided by Authority, I should always have a
greater Reverence for the Judgment of _Aristotle_, than the Example of
_Aristophanes_.
Crimes, then, of this Stamp, can never agree with Comedy; not that we
are for running into the other Extream, and asserting (as I observ'd
before) that Ridicule is the only, because it is the principal Subject
of it. _Inferior_ Crimes, of the more _odious_ Kind, may properly enough
be introduc'd upon that very Account, because they are _odious_: Tho'
those that are equally odious, and ridiculous, are much more _proper_
for it; as Avarice, Arrogance, Superstition, and the like. And others,
of a different Turn, if represented in private Life, may, nay, ought
to be expos'd on the Comic Stage, as Luxury, and the preposterous
Affectation of appearing great without a Fortune, provided this is
done in a merry Way, and the Humour is not lost in the Discipline. But
Murder, Rebellion, ambitious Thirst of Power, and other Vices of that
Strain, belong only to Tragedy. But the _Follies_ of Mankind (as they
are usually term'd) that are not so much _Crimes_, as _Imperfections_,
that offend against the Rules of _Decency_ rather than _Morality_, are
_merely_, and in _every View_, ridiculous; and, upon that Account,
furnish the _most proper_ Matter for Comedy.
But here it is necessary to observe, that all the Virtues, Vices, and
Follies, we have been speaking of, take in the Passions of every Kind:
For it is a very great Mistake to imagine that Comedy should be from
one End to the other, a continu'd Scene of Gaiety and Mirth: Some Parts
of it may be grave, sententious, and even sorrowful. Nor will any one,
I believe, who is a Judge in this Way of Writing, ever find Fault with
_Terence_, who, in the _Andria_, (to omit many other Passages) brings
_Pamphilus_ on the Stage under all this Concern.
_Hoccine est humanum factum, aut inceptum?
hoccine officium patris?_
Was there ever such a Thing done, or thought of
yet by Man? Is this the Tenderness of a Father?
And a little afterwards,
----_Sed nunc quid primum exequar?
Tot me impediunt curæ, quæ meam animum divorse trahunt:
Amor, misericordia hujus, nuptiarum sollicitatio,
Tum patris pudor, qui me tam leni passus est animo usque adhuc
Quæ meo cunque animo libitum est facere; eine ego ut
advorser? hei mihi!
Incertum est quid agam._
But, as the Case now stands, where shall I begin first?
So many Difficulties cumber and distract my Soul at once;
on one Side, Love, Pity for that dear Creature, and the
pressing Importunities I am under to marry: On the other,
the Reverence due to my Father, who has hitherto indulg'd
me in all that Heart could wish; and shall I now turn Rebel
to him at last? Mine is a wretched Situation; which Way to
turn, I know not.
And tho' the Style of Comedy is generally familiar, yet it is sometimes
capable of the _Sublime_. So _Horace_ observes, in his Art of Poetry:
_Interdum tamen & vocem Comœdia tollit,
Iratusque Chremes tumido delitigat ore._
Yet Comedy sometimes may raise her Voice,
And _Chremes_ be allow'd to foam and rail.
_Roscom._
Where Interpreters are of Opinion, that _Horace_ alludes to that Passage
in the _Heautontimorumenos_:
[412]----_Non si ex capite sis meo
Natus, item ut aiunt Minervam esse ex Jove; ea causa magis
Patiar, Clitipho, flagitiis tuis me infamen fieri._
No! had you sprung out of my very Brain, as they say
_Pallas_ did from _Jove_'s, I wou'd not bear to see
myself disgrac'd by your Debauches.
But there is a wide Difference between that Distress, which prevails
in Tragedy, and that which occasionally appears in Comedy. The one
is like a Storm in Winter, which covers the Sky all over with Clouds
and Darkness, only a few transient Gleams of Light interspers'd: The
other is like a Summer's Day, which is generally serene and bright, and
sometimes, tho' seldom, a little over-cast.
The whole Compass, then, of our Passions, may be represented in Comedy,
as well as Tragedy; but in a _Manner_ intirely different, on account
of the Difference of the Characters from which they arise. For it is
certainly true, on the one Hand, that the Foundations of human Happiness
and Misery, all the Springs and Sources of our Affections, are, in the
main, the same, and common to all Mankind: But, it is as evident, on
the other, that every Man, according to his Station in Life, expresses
those Affections in a different Manner, and with peculiar Images. Thus,
in a human Body, the several Parts are in all Men nearly the same; but
the great Variety in their Condition, Education, and Ways of living,
makes the same Variety in their Appearance and gives a different Turn,
even to their Countenance. A Monarch may be as merry as any of his
Subjects; but how different is the Air of his Mirth, from that jovial
Rusticity with which the merry Peasant overflows! A Shepherd, or Swain,
may feel all the Anguish and Distress of Love; but how unlike are
his Complaints to those which a Prince or Sultan would pour out upon
these Occasions! Nay, and the lowest Part of Mankind are not without
_Ambition_; but how widely distant is it from the high and boundless
Views with which Monarchs are affected!
But tho' every Passion may be properly represented in Comedy, yet
the first Place must always be assign'd to Ridicule; that should be,
thro' the whole, the prevailing Turn. But how difficult it is for an
Author to succeed in _just Ridicule_, is very obvious, not only to
them who have attempted it, but to every Body who has duly consider'd
this Way of Writing. It is no easy Performance to rally the Follies
of Mankind in an agreeable Manner; and to _laugh with a good Grace_,
is no vulgar Attainment. But most of the Moderns seem to be quite of
another Opinion, and think, that nothing is more easy, than to _make a
Man ridiculous_. And it must be own'd, that _Laughing_, in their Way,
is one of the easiest Things imaginable, with whom a wry Face is a
Joke, and every Joke a certain Mark of Wit: But _Horace_ and _Terence_
were unluckily of another Way of thinking Our Witlings, whilst they
divert themselves with the Follies of others, expose their own; and the
Laughter they are so ready to raise, returns upon themselves. But, to
say the Truth, our present Taste for Ridicule is itself ridiculous, and
that not only in Comedy, but many _other Compositions_, especially in
_Prose_, which have met with great Approbation from many; with whom, to
invert the Nature of Things, and misrepresent with trivial Gestures,
and low Mimickry, is reckon'd a Proof of a great Genius. Sometimes,
indeed, there may be a great deal of Wit in this Sort of Burlesque, in
describing Heroes and great Actions in ludicrous and low Images, and
setting off Trifles with the Air and Majesty of the Sublime: But if this
is coarsly done, the Composition languid, and over-run with Foppery,
nothing is more nauseous. To trifle in a sprightly Manner, is exceeding
pleasant; but nothing more odious than an affected Dulness, and being
downright foolish: Which is too often the Case with these Wits, who are
wonderfully pleas'd with their own most ingenious Compositions; who are
dealing perpetually in Ironies, and making Sport (as they imagine) with
others. There is, indeed, a peculiar Beauty in an easy and well-turn'd
Irony, which these toothless Snarlers know nothing of; but to utter a
heavy and palpable Falsity, under the Shew of it, is mere Stupidity.
_Res est severa voluptas_----
True Pleasure's sacred Name revere;
Itself is solid, and its Laws severe.
A Maxim, which, if all Writers would remember, the best Judges would be
more agreeably entertain'd in reading them.
[Sidenote: _Twenty-fifth Lecture._]
It may be ask'd, Whether Writers, who would professedly expose the
Follies and Vices of Mankind, ought to make their Figures larger than
the Originals, or describe them exactly as they are, without Addition or
Improvement. Each Side of the Question is not without its Authorities.
_Plautus_ is alledg'd in Favour of the first Opinion, and _Terence_ of
the last. But granting that _Aristophanes_ and _Plautus_, among the
Ancients, and most of the modern Comic Writers, have taken too much
Liberty in this Point; yet it is an allow'd Privilege to Poets, as
well as Painters, not to be confin'd, either in Panegyric, or Satire,
to the strict Rules of Truth. Such Heightnings are no more than meer
_Hyperboles_; nor do those write, or these paint, _contrary_ to Truth,
but _above_ it. The Strokes must be daring and strong, if you would draw
Men, or Characters, to the Life: It is not enough barely to draw the
Outlines of Vice and Folly, if you intend to make the one ridiculous,
or the other detestable; some Colourings must be added, both by the
Painter, and the Poet.
_Prologues_ were anciently made use of only before Comedies; but with
us they are equally suited to them and Tragedy. They who have a Mind
to know the several Sorts of them, may consult _Vossius_. The Ancients
had no _Epilogue_, which is intirely modern, and us'd in common both to
Tragedy or Comedy. _Terence_'s Prologues have no Wit, and very little
Fancy in them; which cannot be said of our Prologues and Epilogues,
full, as they often are, of the most lively Entertainment.
They who wou'd be acquainted with the _Chorus_, the _Cantica_, and the
_Pantomimes_ of the Ancients, must consult _Vossius_ and _Scaliger_,
and such Writers: For these Particulars belong rather to the History of
Poetry, than to any Branch of Critic. The Use of them, especially the
Pantomimes, was to relieve the Audience, that it might not grow weary of
the Play: A Practice which can never be mention'd to their Honour: For
it is a certain Evidence of a bad Taste, when an Audience cannot bear to
sit out a dramatic Entertainment, without being reliev'd by such low
Diversions: But we have the less Reason to wonder at this, who have seen
in our own Time and Nation, Rope and Ladder-Dancers, and other wonderful
Artists of that Class, not only admitted upon the Stage, but (to our
Shame be it spoken) receiv'd there with the utmost Applause. The Age,
indeed, even of _Augustus_, fell into much the same Depravity, which
_Horace_ thus rallies for it:
----_Media inter carmina poscunt
Aut ursum, aut pugiles._
Let _Hockley-hole_ Diversions grace the Stage,
And Dog with Bear, _Stokes_ with his Wife engage.
They, surely, must be of very low Genius, that cannot be content with a
Comedy, unless it is disgrac'd with somewhat lower, a ridiculous Farce.
From what we have said of the Nature and Turn of this Kind of Poem, that
it is a Representation of common and private Life; some Persons will,
perhaps, imagine it to be a Work of Amusement, compos'd without much
Difficulty, or Genius. But this is so far from making it easier, that it
increases the Difficulty of writing it. Take _Horace_'s Opinion,
_Creditur, ex medio quia res arcessit, habere
Sudoris minimum; sed habet Comœdia tanto
Plus oneris; quanto veniæ minus._
As Comedy takes all its Characters
From common Life, 'tis thought a Work of Ease;
Yet where the less Indulgence is allow'd,
The greater Pains and Judgment are requir'd.
_Ch. Carthy._
Nor yet do we, therefore, affirm in general, that Comedy is a Work of
greater Difficulty or Genius than Tragedy, which was the Opinion of
_Antiphanes_, a Comic Poet, as _Vossius_ tells us[415], whom the Reader
may consult for the Arguments and Replies on both Sides.
The Language of Comedy is by that learned Author[416] consider'd in two
Lights; in general, with regard to its Elegance; and more particularly,
as it relates to the Stage. "As to Elegance, he says, that the Language
of _Aristophanes_, and other Writers of the old _Greek_ Comedy, was
more correct and beautiful than _Menander_'s and other Writers of the
new. Among the _Latins_, _Terence_, for Beauty, and Purity of Style, is
superior to all; _Plautus_ is honour'd but with the second Place, tho',
in _Varro_'s Judgment, he deserv'd the first." But no Body has been
so indulgent to _Varro_'s Opinion, as to approve of it[417]. _Horace_
thought very differently, whose Sentiments of _Plautus_ appear from the
Verses already quoted. He proceeds, "If we consider the Language with
regard to the _Drama_, it must be suitable to the Subject, and not at
all sublime; but, on the contrary, easy and familiar, and not set off
with too many Ornaments." It is needless to say more upon this Subject,
because I have already observ'd, in a former Lecture, that the Style of
Comedy is not properly poetical, but an elegant Kind of Prose.
The Names of the _Greek_ Comic Poets have been taken Notice of already.
Among the _Romans_, the most distinguish'd were two, whose Works
are lost, _Cæcilius_, and _Afranius_; and two, which we now have,
_Plautus_, and _Terence_. _Horace_ has observ'd of them,
_Vincere Cæcilius gravitate, Terentius arte._
Compar'd in Character, _Cæcilius_' Part
Is Gravity, and _Terence_'s is Art.
The latter Part of this Observation is clear and obvious, but what that
Gravity was, in which _Cæcilius_ excell'd _Terence_, and which itself
seems in him to superabound, is difficult to guess. By _Art_, says
_Acro_, as _Vossius_ quotes him, is meant, the Propriety of Language,
in which _Terence_ was superior to all other Poets. But I should
rather think, as _Vossius_ does, that by _Art_ is meant the Management
and Disposition of the Plot; in which he far excell'd _Plautus_
also. In Comedy, as the same learned Author observes, the _Romans_
are much inferior to the _Greeks_; and he cites _Quintilian_[419] in
Support of his Opinion, who has deliver'd his Thoughts of _Terence_
with great Freedom. _Miratus sæpius ego sum, qui tanta fuerit populi
Romani gravitas atque constantia, tantusque latinæ dictionis amor, ut_
Terentianis _fabulis capi potuerit; in quibus tam pauci risus, usque
adeo rara scommata, &c. Sed agnosco tempora: Vivebant tum Scipiones;
Catonesque erant in pretio: Et incrementa fiebant tum temporis illius
imperii. Moribus populi in voluptatem prolabentibus, oratio facta est
solutior._ "I have wonder'd," says he, (and I am no less surpriz'd at
the Man's wonderful Way of Thinking) "that the _Romans_ should have so
much Gravity and Composure in their Tempers, such a violent Affection
for the Elegancies of their own Language, as to be fond of _Terence_'s
Plays, where there is so little Mirth, scarce a Joke to be found. But it
was the Turn of that Age: The _Scipio's_, and _Cato's_, were their Men
of Taste, and in high Esteem: They were all Gravity, and their Thoughts
ran only upon Conquests, and Increase of Power. But as the Morals of
that People grew less severe, their Writings had in them more Gaiety
and Pleasure." This is _Quintilian_'s Opinion, as partial, as it is
severe. The Verses which _Cæsar_ wrote upon _Terence_, and _Suetonius_
has handed down to us, are so well known, that it might be thought an
unpardonable Omission, when we are treating upon this Subject, to take
no Notice of them:
_Tu quoque, tu in summis, ô dimidiate Menander,
Poneris, & merito, puri sermonis amator;
Lenibus atque utinam dictis adjuncta foret vis
Comica, & æquato virtus polleret honore
Cum Græcis, neque in hac despectus parte jaceres:
Unum hoc maceror, & doleo tibi deesse, Terenti._
And thou, who mak'st _Mænander_'s Beauties thine,
Shalt foremost in the List of Writers shine;
Correct in Language, chaste in ev'ry Thought,
In all the Rules of Art without a Fault.
Oh! did thy gently-pleasing Scenes impart
As much the Force of Nature, as of Art,
Did but those Strokes of Wit attend thy Lines,
Which thro' the _Grecian_ Page distinguish'd shines,
Thy Works with Rapture wou'd be studied o'er,
Nor _Roman_ Elegance have wish'd for more.
But granting that _Terence_ was no way remarkable for his Talent at
Wit and Repartee, yet (with Submission to so great a Judge) so sharp
and severe a Censure seems more than he deserves. For there are many,
and those of the best Taste, who are more pleas'd with a Writer, that
perpetually keeps up an agreeable Smile, and an easy Chearfulness; than
one, who is every now and then throwing them into Fits of Laughter, and
violent Emotions.
Our modern Comedy, as I observ'd before, has a much greater Resemblance
with what the Ancients call'd the _Middle_ Comedy, than either the
_Old_, or _New_. It is much graver, and less satirical than the first,
and has more delicate Touches of Wit and Raillery than the last.
_Terence_ seems neither by Genius, nor Inclination, to have had the
least Turn for the sharp and satirical Way of Writing: His Excellency
lies rather in copying the common Characters of Human Nature, and
drawing them in the exactest Manner, and truest Light; than in painting
any of its Extravagancies, whether in Vice, or Folly. The modern
Comedies have certainly more Wit and Humour in their Composition, than
the ancient; more Art in working up, and unravelling their Plots; and a
greater Variety of Persons concern'd in them: And especially in genteel
Comedy, our Characters have more good Breeding, and Politeness; and
even in Low Life, our comical Figures are more ridiculous. But then,
on the other Hand, the Language of _Terence_ is more pure and correct,
more expressive and elegant than ours: He has drawn his Characters more
natural, and more accurately observ'd the Rules of Art. But to give
the Moderns an absolute Superiority in this Way of Writing, they have
nothing more to do, than to prune and retrench some Excrescencies,
without studying for any further Improvements: Let them abate of their
Luxuriancy, and the Business is done at once. Nay, they seem to me
already superior to them in all other Respects, except (which I am
asham'd to own) in that intire Regard to Modesty which is preserv'd in
all _Terence_'s Characters. If we compare the modern Comic Writers
in the several Parts of _Europe_, Mons. _Rapin_ tells us, that the
_Spaniards_ have one or two, but one, especially, that is considerable;
the _Italians_ have none worth taking Notice of. The Dispute, therefore,
will lie betwixt the _French_ and us. And who has more Wit and Humour,
is more elegant in Style, or natural in his Characters, than _Moliere_?
Tho', in general, if we are not too partial to our own Performances, we
are in this, as in all other Parts of Poetry, superior to the _French_;
but the Superiority is no where so disputable.
As to our _English_ Comedies, which are written in Prose, if any
over-nice Critic questions whether they can be justly reckon'd poetical
Compositions, because in the Definition of Poetry, which we have already
given, some Sort of Numbers are made essential to it; the plain Answer
is this: If we keep close to the Terms of that Definition, our Comedies
may justly be consider'd as Poems, in every other Respect but this:
The Definition is form'd upon the universal Practice of the Ancients,
who are, and ought to be our great Masters in this Art; and it is more
reasonable to continue, than alter it, in Compliance with the Practice
of modern Writers. But the Question, whatever Way it is determin'd, is
only an idle Controversy about Words, and of very little Moment: For
the Verses of the ancient Comedies differ'd so little from Prose, that
the nicest Ear could not always distinguish them: They had their proper
Measures, but so loose and uncertain, that it is often difficult to
determine which is the true Way of scanning them: And in Comedy more
regular and confin'd Measures had been ridiculous. How inexcusable,
then, is the Practice of the _French_ Poets, who have written whole
Comedies in Rhyme, and Heroic Verse? Rhymes are ridiculous enough in
Tragedy; but that an easy and familiar Conversation, such as Comedy is
suppos'd to be, should be all in Rhyme and Epic Verse, has something in
it so extravagantly absurd, that I am surpriz'd a Nation, so remarkable
for Wit and good Sense, could bear with it.
The Source of those agreeable Reflections, that Comedy supplies us with,
is so obvious, that it needs no Enquiry. Mirth is always pleasing, and
so is a lively Representation of Human Nature, of the Incidents of
common Life, and those Characters which are every Day before us. Nor is
the Cause of that ill-natur'd Pleasure less easy to be assign'd, which
arises from Satire, and Ridicule: Every Body is so civil to himself, as
to suppose he is not the Person aim'd at. Who, upon these Occasions,
ever thinks of _Horace_'s Observation?
----_Quid rides? mutato nomine de Te
Fabula narratur._
What, dost thou laugh, and think that thou art free?
Fool, change the Name, the Story's told of thee.
The Images, then, of the Vices and Follies of other Men, flatter that
Pride, which is too natural to Mankind; who are apt to think their own
Characters rais'd, by the Ruin of others: This is such a Pleasure as we
ought to be asham'd of. But some there are, of a quite different Turn,
who are as much delighted with the Moral of the Play, the Success of
Virtue, and the Punishments or Disappointments which Vice meets with
in it: And others have no Regard to any Character but the Poet's, are
taken only with the Turns of Wit, and the Genius of the Writer. But
_Errors_ and _Imperfections_ are the great Source of Delight in all
Dramatical Performances, especially in Comedy, which has, in general,
more Friends and Admirers than Tragedy: Because there are few Persons
of so great a Genius, or so refin'd a Taste, as to be sensible of those
generous and agreeable Emotions, which arise from Tenderness, and
Compassion, and even Distress itself. Scenes of Mirth are pleasing to
every Imagination, those of Sorrow only to a few. I can only wish, that
these different Passions which arise from the Gravity of Tragedy, or the
Gaiety of Comedy, were made useful and instrumental to Virtue; and that
our Theatres were not more frequented for the Amusements they supply us
with, than for the Lessons of Morality and good Sense instill'd in them.