And this is Professor Huxley's comment:--

"This description of a volition may be criticized on various

grounds. More especially does it seem defective in restricting the

term "will" to that feeling which arises when we act, or appear to

act, as causes: for one may will to strike, without striking; or to

think of something which we have forgotten."

But is not this met by the last six of the words which Professor Huxley

has italicised? They are certainly very wide, and one might ask, in

addition, what word of absolute "restriction" is employed by Hume in

this passage? He indicates what he means by the word "Will," by saying

that it is what we are conscious of upon certain occasions, and this

gives a clue to the quality of the sensation; but it was obvious, and

did not need saying, that the quality of the sensation might remain,

though its complete outcome were baulked.

In presenting and criticizing Hume's views upon such topics as Theism,

Immortality and Miracles, Necessary Truth, &c., Professor Huxley is, so

far as we have discovered, both accurate and candid. It is only

necessary to suggest that the reader should keep his eyes open--for

there is really not one new word to be written upon these matters.

It is not often that you are told what a man died of. You are put off

with some such phrase as "a painful malady," or a "family complaint."

Yet, it is often just what we desire to know, because the illness from

which a man suffers stands in direct relation to his power of work and

his capacity of endurance. Consumption, except in its later stage, is

not usually painful. Nor does it necessarily make work difficult. The

same may be said of maladies which come on paroxysmally, and leave those

blessed intervals of ease of which Paley, himself a sufferer, writes

with such unaccustomed tenderness. In the _Gibbon_ of this series, Mr.

Morison slurred over the very curious, perhaps unexampled fact, that

Gibbon had long concealed a bad hernia and had done nothing for it. It

finally killed him, but that with his amazing corpulence he could live a

long time with a serious rupture, and keep his general health and his

placidity, is very interesting. Professor Huxley tells us point-blank

what Hume died of, and it is quite as well for biographers to be

specific in such matters. We may just inquire, in passing, where the

Professor got his "_solid_ certainty of waking bliss"? It seems pedantic

to notice every trifle of this sort, but if small errors in quotation

were, so to speak, nipped in the bud, many logomachics would be saved.

How much discussion, in pulpits and out of them, has been wasted upon

the supposition that Pope wrote that "an honest man's the _noblest_ work

of God." Whereas Pope wrote "noble," and it was Burns, in the "Cotter's

Saturday Night," who started the error. Now "solid" is as good sense as

"sober," but the latter is what suits the verse best, and it is what

Milton made Comus say.

* * * * *

The "run" upon Dante continues. Here is _Dante: Six Sermons_, by Philip

H. Wicksteed, M.A. (C. Kegan Paul & Co.) "In allowing," says Mr.

Wicksteed--

"the publication of this little volume, my only thought is to let it

take its chance with other fugitive productions of the pulpit that

appeal to the press as a means of widening the possible area rather

than extending the period over which the preacher's voice may

extend; and my only justification is the hope that it may here and

there reach hands to which no more adequate treatment of the subject

was likely to find its way."

The sermons were delivered first at Little Portland Street Chapel, where

Mr. Wicksteed succeeded Dr. Martineau, and afterwards at the Free

Christian Church at Croydon, where the Rev. Rodolph R. Suffield formerly

preached, but where the Rev. E. M. Geldart is now (we believe) the

minister. The book contains only about 160 pages, and gives a very

readable and complete account both of Dante and his poetry. The style is

that of the pulpit, iterative, florid, and full of amplifications; but

that was natural. It is a serious matter, however, that the author keeps

up his strain of eulogy from end to end at a pitch which has an almost

_falsetto_ sound with it. It seems hardly fair to leave unnoticed the

charges of artificiality and worse which have been abundantly made

against Dante and his poetry, especially as this book is intended for

popular use; and it is a pity that Mr. Wicksteed should go out of his

way to settle difficult questions in this off-hand way:--

"It is often held and taught, that a strong and definite didactic

purpose must inevitably be fatal to the highest forms of art,

must clip the wings of poetic imagination, distort the symmetry of

poetic sympathy, and substitute hard and angular contrasts for the

melting grace of those curved lines of beauty which pass one into

the other. Had Dante never lived, I know not where we should turn

for the decisive refutation of this thought; but in Dante it is

the very combination said to be impossible that inspires and

enthrals us. A perfect artist guided in the exercise of his art by

an unflagging intensity of moral purpose; a prophet, submitting

his inspirations"--

and so forth, in the same strained and insistent key. But no wise critic

has ever said that "a strong and definite didactic purpose must

inevitably be fatal to the highest forms of art." What is maintained on

_that_ side of the debate is that the "purpose" must not be permitted to

shape the poem; that the poem itself must be moulded upon lines of

beauty and not of "moral purpose"--though the "moral purpose" may be

immanent in the work. But who is bound to take Mr. Wicksteed's word for

the statement that Dante's great poem is not the very strongest

confirmation in all literature of the truth that a _controlling_ and

_interfering_ moral purpose injures a poem, Milton's "Paradise Lost"

being the next strongest?

* * * * *

A well-known, and also imperfectly known, "nook in the Apennines" is the

Republic of San Marino, about which there is a good deal of information

in _A Freak of Freedom; or, The Republic of San Marino_, by J. Theodore

Bent (Longman, Green & Co.) It appears to be partly the record of a

visit paid by the author to the spot in 1877, and is illustrated by

fifteen woodcuts from the author's own drawings, to say nothing of a

map. Mr. Bent was presented with the freedom of the Republic, and we do

not know that any one, except another citizen of it, or some near

neighbour, could criticize his little book to much advantage. But we

trust he will permit us to remark that he might have made his work more

amusing and instructive. There is a good deal about the place in

Addison, and this is referred to (among other interesting matters) in an

article in Knight's "Penny Magazine" for May 31st, 1834. But, though we

have not time to make references, we have a strong impression that there

are many descriptions, new and old, of San Marino, which it would have

been refreshing to quote. We know, however, of no work which gives so

much information as Mr. Bent's.

* * * * *

It might be the subject of a very plausible doubt whether French novels

of a high order ought to be translated into English, since those who are

really capable of understanding and enjoying them will be certain to

understand French, and since, moreover, the finest qualities of the

writing must disappear in the process of translation. Then, with regard

to French novels of a much lower class, they are not worth the trouble

of turning into English; are more likely in themselves to do harm than

good; and their reproduction in our language cannot tend to encourage

"native talent." We have before us, from Messrs. Sampson Low, Marston,

Searle, & Rivington, _The Cat and Battledore, and other Tales_, by

Honoré de Balzac, translated into English by Philip Kent, B.A. (3 vols.)

Perhaps it was not a bad idea to give the merely English reader some

chance of appreciating the extraordinary qualities of the author of "Le

Père Goriot," "Le Peau de Chagrin," and "La Recherche de l'Absolu"

(neither of which is, the general reader may be told, in this

collection): but Balzac is not a writer with a soul in him, and the

experiment need not be carried any further. Those who know nothing of

Balzac, and who read novels simply for excitement, will be glad of these

three volumes, and the glimpse they give of an unique writer; but to

studious readers Balzac's novels have an interest which is mainly

psychological. The preface (here translated) to the "Comédie Humaine" is

a strange presumptuous medley, which raises, like all the author's most

characteristic works, the question of perfect sanity--a question which

Mr. Leslie Stephen once opened very acutely, and dismissed too curtly.

To have read through a story of Balzac's is to have passed through one

of those wonderfully vivid dreams which leave you puzzled and lost at

the moment of awaking. It seems to be generally admitted that his

writings do not tend to make his readers "immoral" in the usual sense of

the adjective, but there is something ineffably droll in his patronage

of "Christianity, especially Catholic Christianity," and that defence of

his own writings which the reader may amuse himself by studying in the

preface. He is not only conservative, he is monarchical, and objects to

representative Government, if it "hands us over to the rule of the

masses." But what chiefly concerns those who buy novels, or send for

them to the libraries, is the quality of the stories, and they may

depend upon getting a full measure of excitement, with some instruction,

out of "La Maison du Chat qui pelote" and the companion stories.

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, October 1879 · 第 44 / 44 题