XIV. The last danger of elevation of stile consists in the difficulty of
supporting it. But it appears to me, that the censure which is commonly
passed in this respect is unjust. I have known many, who have been very
scrupulous in examining whether the stile was equal, and have been very
liberal in the praises of those who preserved this quality, and very free
of their abuse of those who have been deficient in it. They are very
exact in noting, whether an author falls, or rises it; when they ought
rather to attend to the thing the pen is describing. It would be very
wonderful if he should fall, who is always creeping close to the ground;
and, indeed, whence can he fall from, if he is never elevated? It should
be considered, on the other hand, that descending and falling are two
very different things. He who takes a flight is not obliged to pursue
his course at the same height or on the same level to which he rose; for
he may descend at his pleasure, as even the eagles do the same. And of
what consequence is his descending a little, since he always continues
much superior to him who never rises off the ground? The very caution of
those, who are so careful about not falling, proves, that they never will
attempt rising to any dangerous height, for this scrupulous vigilance is
not natural to sublime spirits, as they are apt to mount on the wings of
the wind, and leave to imagination the route they shall pursue. They do
not strive to support themselves at the point of altitude to which they
rose, as the appearance of such an endeavour would give a distasteful air
to the stile; for a becoming negligence is less disgusting than a forced
elevation. It ought also to be considered, that the same happy manner of
expressing himself does not occur to a man at all times alike; and what
is he to do in such a case? give a loose to the pen, till it happens to
fall upon phrases equally energic, and delicate with the antecedent?
What labour can be supposed more ridiculous than that of an author, who
with an instrument in his hand is always taking the height to which he
has raised his stile above the humble level, for the purpose of avoiding
suffering it to descend below that fixed point of altitude? I therefore
think the neglecting to do this is not a defect in a writer, but rather
argues that he is mistaken who censures him for the omission. But the
want of judgment or candour in him who criticises, is always dangerous
to him who writes.
XV. Besides this, the difference of objects produces of itself, and
makes necessary, such an inequality as we have just hinted. There are
some which naturally inflame the idea, and hurry on, or give a spring
to the pen. There are others, which do not agitate the imagination, and
should be described in plain words expressive of sound judgment. Some
require majestic language, and there are others in which it would appear
ridiculous. In my opinion, he would be guilty of the greatest abuse of
stile, who did not attend more to nature than the rules of art.
XVI. I am well aware, that the essential part of history does not consist
in the excellence of stile; but that this is an accidental quality, which
adorns and makes it more useful. Many read it when they find the stile
engaging, who would not read it, if it wanted that requisite. The matter
also makes a better impression on the mind, as the memory retains better
what is read with delight, in the same manner that the stomach does what
is eat with an appetite. An infinite number of people are acquainted with
the history of the conquest of Mexico, who would have remained totally
ignorant of the circumstances of it, if they had not been written by the
sublime and delicate pen of Don Antonio de Solis. Finally, Lucian lays
down excellent rules for writing history; and, in a little treatise he
compiled on purpose, prescribes that the stile should be clear, and so
far elevated as to approach nearly to the loftiness of speech made use of
in poetry.