Mr. Campbell:--the one is the most ambitious and aspiring of living

poets, the other the most humble and prosaic. If the poetry of the one

is like the arch of the rainbow, spanning and adorning the earth, that

of the other is like a dull, leaden cloud hanging over it. Mr. Crabbe's

style might be cited as an answer to Audrey's question--"Is poetry

a true thing?" There are here no ornaments, no flights of fancy, no

illusions of sentiment, no tinsel of words. His song is one sad reality,

one unraised, unvaried note of unavailing woe. Literal fidelity serves

him in the place of invention; he assumes importance by a number of

petty details; he rivets attention by being tedious. He not only deals

in incessant matters of fact, but in matters of fact of the most

familiar, the least animating, and the most unpleasant kind; but he

relies for the effect of novelty on the microscopic minuteness with

which he dissects the most trivial objects--and for the interest he

excites, on the unshrinking determination with which he handles the most

painful. His poetry has an official and professional air. He is called

in to cases of difficult births, of fractured limbs, or breaches of the

peace; and makes out a parochial list of accidents and offences. He

takes the most trite, the most gross and obvious and revolting part of

nature, for the subject of his elaborate descriptions; but it is Nature

still, and Nature is a great and mighty Goddess! It is well for the

Reverend Author that it is so. Individuality is, in his theory, the only

definition of poetry. Whatever _is_, he hitches into rhyme. Whoever

makes an exact image of any thing on the earth, however deformed or

insignificant, according to him, must succeed--and he himself has

succeeded. Mr. Crabbe is one of the most popular and admired of our

living authors. That he is so, can be accounted for on no other

principle than the strong ties that bind us to the world about us, and

our involuntary yearnings after whatever in any manner powerfully and

directly reminds us of it. His Muse is not one of _the Daughters of

Memory_, but the old toothless, mumbling dame herself, doling out the

gossip and scandal of the neighbourhood, recounting _totidem verbis et

literis_, what happens in every place of the kingdom every hour in the

year, and fastening always on the worst as the most palatable morsels.

But she is a circumstantial old lady, communicative, scrupulous, leaving

nothing to the imagination, harping on the smallest grievances, a

village-oracle and critic, most veritable, most identical, bringing us

acquainted with persons and things just as they chanced to exist, and

giving us a local interest in all she knows and tells. Mr. Crabbe's

Helicon is choked up with weeds and corruption; it reflects no light

from heaven, it emits no cheerful sound: no flowers of love, of hope,

or joy spring up near it, or they bloom only to wither in a moment. Our

poet's verse does not put a spirit of youth in every thing, but a spirit

of fear, despondency, and decay: it is not an electric spark to kindle

or expand, but acts like the torpedo's touch to deaden or contract. It

lends no dazzling tints to fancy, it aids no soothing feelings in the

heart, it gladdens no prospect, it stirs no wish; in its view the

current of life runs slow, dull, cold, dispirited, half under ground,

muddy, and clogged with all creeping things. The world is one vast

infirmary; the hill of Parnassus is a penitentiary, of which our author

is the overseer: to read him is a penance, yet we read on! Mr. Crabbe,

it must be confessed, is a repulsive writer. He contrives to "turn

diseases to commodities," and makes a virtue of necessity. He puts us

out of conceit with this world, which perhaps a severe divine should do;

yet does not, as a charitable divine ought, point to another. His morbid

feelings droop and cling to the earth, grovel where they should soar;

and throw a dead weight on every aspiration of the soul after the good

or beautiful. By degrees we submit, and are reconciled to our fate, like

patients to the physician, or prisoners in the condemned cell. We can

only explain this by saying, as we said before, that Mr. Crabbe gives

us one part of nature, the mean, the little, the disgusting, the

distressing; that he does this thoroughly and like a master, and we

forgive all the rest.

Mr. Crabbe's first poems were published so long ago as the year 1782,

and received the approbation of Dr. Johnson only a little before he

died. This was a testimony from an enemy; for Dr. Johnson was not an

admirer of the simple in style or minute in description. Still he was an

acute, strong-minded man, and could see truth when it was presented to

him, even through the mist of his prejudices and his foibles. There was

something in Mr. Crabbe's intricate points that did not, after all, so

ill accord with the Doctor's purblind vision; and he knew quite

enough of the petty ills of life to judge of the merit of our poet's

descriptions, though he himself chose to slur them over in high-sounding

dogmas or general invectives. Mr. Crabbe's earliest poem of the

_Village_ was recommended to the notice of Dr. Johnson by Sir Joshua

Reynolds; and we cannot help thinking that a taste for that sort of

poetry, which leans for support on the truth and fidelity of its

imitations of nature, began to display itself much about that time, and,

in a good measure, in consequence of the direction of the public taste

to the subject of painting. Book-learning, the accumulation of wordy

common-places, the gaudy pretensions of poetical fiction, had enfeebled

and perverted our eye for nature. The study of the fine arts, which came

into fashion about forty years ago, and was then first considered as a

polite accomplishment, would tend imperceptibly to restore it. Painting

is essentially an imitative art; it cannot subsist for a moment on empty

generalities: the critic, therefore, who had been used to this sort of

substantial entertainment, would be disposed to read poetry with the

eye of a connoisseur, would be little captivated with smooth, polished,

unmeaning periods, and would turn with double eagerness and relish to

the force and precision of individual details, transferred, as it were,

to the page from the canvas. Thus an admirer of Teniers or Hobbima

might think little of the pastoral sketches of Pope or Goldsmith; even

Thompson describes not so much the naked object as what he sees in his

mind's eye, surrounded and glowing with the mild, bland, genial vapours

of his brain:--but the adept in Dutch interiors, hovels, and pig-styes

must find in Mr. Crabbe a man after his own heart. He is the very thing

itself; he paints in words, instead of colours: there is no other

difference. As Mr. Crabbe is not a painter, only because he does not use

a brush and colours, so he is for the most part a poet, only because

he writes in lines of ten syllables. All the rest might be found in a

newspaper, an old magazine, or a county-register. Our author is himself

a little jealous of the prudish fidelity of his homely Muse, and tries

to justify himself by precedents. He brings as a parallel instance of

merely literal description, Pope's lines on the gay Duke of Buckingham,

beginning "In the worst inn's worst room see Villiers lies!" But surely

nothing can be more dissimilar. Pope describes what is striking, Crabbe

would have described merely what was there. The objects in Pope stand

out to the fancy from the mixture of the mean with the gaudy, from the

contrast of the scene and the character. There is an appeal to the

imagination; you see what is passing in a poetical point of view. In

Crabbe there is no foil, no contrast, no impulse given to the mind. It

is all on a level and of a piece. In fact, there is so little connection

between the subject-matter of Mr. Crabbe's lines and the ornament of

rhyme which is tacked to them, that many of his verses read like serious

burlesque, and the parodies which have been made upon them are hardly so

quaint as the originals.

Mr. Crabbe's great fault is certainly that he is a sickly, a querulous,

a uniformly dissatisfied poet. He sings the country; and he sings it in

a pitiful tone. He chooses this subject only to take the charm out of

it, and to dispel the illusion, the glory, and the dream, which had

hovered over it in golden verse from Theocritus to Cowper. He sets out

with professing to overturn the theory which had hallowed a shepherd's

life, and made the names of grove and valley music to our ears, in order

to give us truth in its stead; but why not lay aside the fool's cap and

bells at once? Why not insist on the unwelcome reality in plain prose?

If our author is a poet, why trouble himself with statistics? If he is a

statistic writer, why set his ill news to harsh and grating verse? The

philosopher in painting the dark side of human nature may have reason

on his side, and a moral lesson or remedy in view. The tragic poet, who

shews the sad vicissitudes of things and the disappointments of the

passions, at least strengthens our yearnings after imaginary good, and

lends wings to our desires, by which we, "at one bound, high overleap

all bound" of actual suffering. But Mr. Crabbe does neither. He gives

us discoloured paintings of life; helpless, repining, unprofitable,

unedifying distress. He is not a philosopher, but a sophist, a

misanthrope in verse; a _namby-pamby_ Mandeville, a Malthus turned

metrical romancer. He professes historical fidelity; but his vein is not

dramatic; nor does he give us the _pros_ and _cons_ of that versatile

gipsey, Nature. He does not indulge his fancy, or sympathise with us, or

tell us how the poor feel; but how he should feel in their situation,

which we do not want to know. He does not weave the web of their lives

of a mingled yarn, good and ill together, but clothes them all in the

same dingy linsey-woolsey, or tinges them with a green and yellow

melancholy. He blocks out all possibility of good, cancels the hope, or

even the wish for it as a weakness; check-mates Tityrus and Virgil at

the game of pastoral cross-purposes, disables all his adversary's white

pieces, and leaves none but black ones on the board. The situation of a

country clergyman is not necessarily favourable to the cultivation of

the Muse. He is set down, perhaps, as he thinks, in a small curacy for

life, and he takes his revenge by imprisoning the reader's imagination

in luckless verse. Shut out from social converse, from learned colleges

and halls, where he passed his youth, he has no cordial fellow-feeling

with the unlettered manners of the _Village_ or the _Borough_; and he

describes his neighbours as more uncomfortable and discontented than

himself. All this while he dedicates successive volumes to rising

generations of noble patrons; and while he desolates a line of coast

with sterile, blighting lines, the only leaf of his books where honour,

beauty, worth, or pleasure bloom, is that inscribed to the Rutland

family! We might adduce instances of what we have said from every page

of his works: let one suffice--

"Thus by himself compelled to live each day,

To wait for certain hours the tide's delay;

At the same times the same dull views to see,

The bounding marsh-bank and the blighted tree;

The water only when the tides were high,

When low, the mud half-covered and half-dry;

The sun-burnt tar that blisters on the planks,

And bank-side stakes in their uneven ranks;

Heaps of entangled weeds that slowly float,

As the tide rolls by the impeded boat.

When tides were neap, and in the sultry day,

Through the tall bounding mud-banks made their way,

Which on each side rose swelling, and below

The dark warm flood ran silently and slow;

There anchoring, Peter chose from man to hide,

There hang his head, and view the lazy tide

In its hot slimy channel slowly glide;

Where the small eels, that left the deeper way

For the warm shore, within the shallows play;

Where gaping muscles, left upon the mud,

Slope their slow passage to the fall'n flood:

Here dull and hopeless he'd lie down and trace

How side-long crabs had crawled their crooked race;

Or sadly listen to the tuneless cry

Of fishing gull or clanging golden-eye;

What time the sea-birds to the marsh would come,

And the loud bittern, from the bull-rush home,

Gave from the salt ditch-side the bellowing boom:

He nursed the feelings these dull scenes produce

And loved to stop beside the opening sluice;

Where the small stream, confined in narrow bound,

Ran with a dull, unvaried, saddening sound;

Where all, presented to the eye or ear,

Oppressed the soul with misery, grief, and fear."

This is an exact _fac-simile_ of some of the most unlovely parts of the

creation. Indeed the whole of Mr. Crabbe's _Borough_, from which the

above passage is taken, is done so to the life, that it seems almost

like some sea-monster, crawled out of the neighbouring slime, and

harbouring a breed of strange vermin, with a strong local scent of

tar and bulge-water. Mr. Crabbe's _Tales_ are more readable than his

_Poems_; but in proportion as the interest increases, they become more

oppressive. They turn, one and all, upon the same sort of teazing,

helpless, mechanical, unimaginative distress;--and though it is not

easy to lay them down, you never wish to take them up again. Still in

this way, they are highly finished, striking, and original portraits,

worked out with an eye to nature, and an intimate knowledge of the

small and intricate folds of the human heart. Some of the best are

the _Confidant_, the story of _Silly Shore_, the _Young Poet_, the

_Painter_. The episode of _Phoebe Dawson_ in the _Village_, is one of

the most tender and pensive; and the character of the methodist parson

who persecutes the sailor's widow with his godly, selfish love, is one

of the most profound. In a word, if Mr. Crabbe's writings do not add

greatly to the store of entertaining and delightful fiction, yet they

will remain "as a thorn in the side of poetry," perhaps for a century to

come!

[Footnote A:

"Like angels' visits, short and far between."--.

_Blair's Grave_.]

[Footnote B: Is not this word, which occurs in the last line but one,

(as well as before) an instance of that repetition, which we so often

meet with in the most correct and elegant writers?]

* * * * *

SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH.

The subject of the present article is one of the ablest and most

accomplished men of the age, both as a writer, a speaker, and a

converser. He is, in fact, master of almost every known topic, whether

of a passing or of a more recondite nature. He has lived much in

society, and is deeply conversant with books. He is a man of the

world and a scholar; but the scholar gives the tone to all his other

acquirements and pursuits. Sir James is by education and habit, and we

were going to add, by the original turn of his mind, a college-man; and

perhaps he would have passed his time most happily and respectably, had

he devoted himself entirely to that kind of life. The strength of his

faculties would have been best developed, his ambition would have met

its proudest reward, in the accumulation and elaborate display of grave

and useful knowledge. As it is, it may be said, that in company he talks

well, but too much; that in writing he overlays the original subject and

spirit of the composition, by an appeal to authorities and by too formal

a method; that in public speaking the logician takes place of the

orator, and that he fails to give effect to a particular point or to

urge an immediate advantage home upon his adversary from the enlarged

scope of his mind, and the wide career he takes in the field of

argument.

To consider him in the last point of view, first. As a political

partisan, he is rather the lecturer than the advocate. He is able to

instruct and delight an impartial and disinterested audience by the

extent of his information, by his acquaintance with general principles,

by the clearness and aptitude of his illustrations, by vigour and

copiousness of style; but where he has a prejudiced or unfair antagonist

to contend with, he is just as likely to put weapons into his enemy's

hands as to wrest them from him, and his object seems to be rather to

deserve than to obtain success. The characteristics of his mind are

retentiveness and comprehension, with facility of production: but he is

not equally remarkable for originality of view, or warmth of feeling, or

liveliness of fancy. His eloquence is a little rhetorical; his reasoning

chiefly logical: he can bring down the account of knowledge on a vast

variety of subjects to the present moment, he can embellish any cause he

undertakes by the most approved and graceful ornaments, he can support

it by a host of facts and examples, but he cannot advance it a step

forward by placing it on a new and triumphant 'vantage-ground, nor

can he overwhelm and break down the artificial fences and bulwarks

of sophistry by the irresistible tide of manly enthusiasm. Sir James

Mackintosh is an accomplished debater, rather than a powerful orator: he

is distinguished more as a man of wonderful and variable talent than

as a man of commanding intellect. His mode of treating a question is

critical, and not parliamentary. It has been formed in the closet and

the schools, and is hardly fitted for scenes of active life, or the

collisions of party-spirit. Sir James reasons on the square; while the

arguments of his opponents are loaded with iron or gold. He makes,

indeed, a respectable ally, but not a very formidable opponent. He is as

likely, however, to prevail on a neutral, as he is almost certain to be

baffled on a hotly contested ground. On any question of general

policy or legislative improvement, the Member for Nairn is heard with

advantage, and his speeches are attended with effect: and he would have

equal weight and influence at other times, if it were the object of the

House to hear reason, as it is his aim to speak it. But on subjects of

peace or war, of political rights or foreign interference, where the

waves of party run high, and the liberty of nations or the fate of

mankind hangs trembling in the scales, though he probably displays equal

talent, and does full and heaped justice to the question (abstractedly

speaking, or if it were to be tried before an impartial assembly), yet

we confess we have seldom heard him, on such occasions, without pain for

the event. He did not slur his own character and pretensions, but he

compromised the argument. He spoke _the truth, the whole truth, and

nothing but the truth_; but the House of Commons (we dare aver it) is

not the place where the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

truth can be spoken with safety or with advantage. The judgment of the

House is not a balance to weigh scruples and reasons to the turn of a

fraction: another element, besides the love of truth, enters into the

composition of their decisions, the reaction of which must be calculated

upon and guarded against. If our philosophical statesman had to open the

case before a class of tyros, or a circle of grey-beards, who wished to

form or to strengthen their judgments upon fair and rational grounds,

nothing could be more satisfactory, more luminous, more able or more

decisive than the view taken of it by Sir James Mackintosh. But the

House of Commons, as a collective body, have not the docility of youth,

the calm wisdom of age; and often only want an excuse to do wrong, or

to adhere to what they have already determined upon; and Sir James,

in detailing the inexhaustible stores of his memory and reading, in

unfolding the wide range of his theory and practice, in laying down

the rules and the exceptions, in insisting upon the advantages and the

objections with equal explicitness, would be sure to let something drop

that a dextrous and watchful adversary would easily pick up and turn

against him, if this were found necessary; or if with so many _pros_ and

_cons_, doubts and difficulties, dilemmas and alternatives thrown into

it, the scale, with its natural bias to interest and power, did not

already fly up and kick the beam. There wanted unity of purpose,

impetuosity of feeling to break through the phalanx of hostile and

inveterate prejudice arrayed against him. He gave a handle to his

enemies; threw stumbling-blocks in the way of his friends. He raised so

many objections for the sake of answering them, proposed so many doubts

for the sake of solving them, and made so many concessions where none

were demanded, that his reasoning had the effect of neutralizing itself;

it became a mere exercise of the understanding without zest or spirit

left in it; and the provident engineer who was to shatter in pieces

the strong-holds of corruption and oppression, by a well-directed and

unsparing discharge of artillery, seemed to have brought not only his

own cannon-balls, but his own wool-packs along with him to ward off

the threatened mischief. This was a good deal the effect of his maiden

speech on the transfer of Genoa, to which Lord Castlereagh did not deign

an answer, and which another Honourable Member called "a _finical_

speech." It was a most able, candid, closely argued, and philosophical

exposure of that unprincipled transaction; but for this very reason it

was a solecism in the place where it was delivered. Sir James has, since

this period, and with the help of practice, lowered himself to the tone

of the House; and has also applied himself to questions more congenial

to his habits of mind, and where the success would be more likely to be

proportioned to his zeal and his exertions.

There was a greater degree of power, or of dashing and splendid effect

(we wish we could add, an equally humane and liberal spirit) in the

_Lectures on the Law of Nature and Nations_, formerly delivered by Sir

James (then Mr.) Mackintosh, in Lincoln's-Inn Hall. He shewed greater

confidence; was more at home there. The effect was more electrical and

instantaneous, and this elicited a prouder display of intellectual

riches, and a more animated and imposing mode of delivery. He grew

wanton with success. Dazzling others by the brilliancy of his

acquirements, dazzled himself by the admiration they excited, he lost

fear as well as prudence; dared every thing, carried every thing before

him. The Modern Philosophy, counterscarp, outworks, citadel, and all,

fell without a blow, by "the whiff and wind of his fell _doctrine_," as

if it had been a pack of cards. The volcano of the French Revolution

was seen expiring in its own flames, like a bon-fire made of straw: the

principles of Reform were scattered in all directions, like chaff before

the keen northern blast. He laid about him like one inspired; nothing

could withstand his envenomed tooth. Like some savage beast got into

the garden of the fabled Hesperides, he made clear work of it, root and

branch, with white, foaming tusks--

"Laid waste the borders, and o'erthrew the bowers."

The havoc was amazing, the desolation was complete. As to our visionary

sceptics and Utopian philosophers, they stood no chance with our

lecturer--he did not "carve them as a dish fit for the Gods, but hewed

them as a carcase fit for hounds." Poor Godwin, who had come, in the

_bonhommie_ and candour of his nature, to hear what new light had broken

in upon his old friend, was obliged to quit the field, and slunk away

after an exulting taunt thrown out at "such fanciful chimeras as a

golden mountain or a perfect man." Mr. Mackintosh had something of the

air, much of the dexterity and self-possession, of a political and

philosophical juggler; and an eager and admiring audience gaped and

greedily swallowed the gilded bait of sophistry, prepared for their

credulity and wonder. Those of us who attended day after day, and were

accustomed to have all our previous notions confounded and struck out of

our hands by some metaphysical legerdemain, were at last at some loss to

know _whether two and two made four_, till we had heard the lecturer's

opinion on that head. He might have some mental reservation on the

subject, some pointed ridicule to pour upon the common supposition,

some learned authority to quote against it. To anticipate the line of

argument he might pursue, was evidently presumptuous and premature. One

thing only appeared certain, that whatever opinion he chose to take up,

he was able to make good either by the foils or the cudgels, by gross

banter or nice distinctions, by a well-timed mixture of paradox and

common-place, by an appeal to vulgar prejudices or startling scepticism.

It seemed to be equally his object, or the tendency of his Discourses,

to unsettle every principle of reason or of common sense, and to leave

his audience at the mercy of the _dictum_ of a lawyer, the nod of a

minister, or the shout of a mob. To effect this purpose, he drew largely

on the learning of antiquity, on modern literature, on history, poetry,

and the belles-lettres, on the Schoolmen and on writers of novels,

French, English, and Italian. In mixing up the sparkling julep, that

by its potent operation was to scour away the dregs and feculence and

peccant humours of the body politic, he seemed to stand with his back

to the drawers in a metaphysical dispensary, and to take out of them

whatever ingredients suited his purpose. In this way he had an antidote

for every error, an answer to every folly. The writings of Burke, Hume,

Berkeley, Paley, Lord Bacon, Jeremy Taylor, Grotius, Puffendorf, Cicero,

Aristotle, Tacitus, Livy, Sully, Machiavel, Guicciardini, Thuanus, lay

open beside him, and he could instantly lay his hand upon the passage,

and quote them chapter and verse to the clearing up of all difficulties,

and the silencing of all oppugners. Mr. Mackintosh's Lectures were after

all but a kind of philosophical centos. They were profound, brilliant,

new to his hearers; but the profundity, the brilliancy, the novelty were

not his own. He was like Dr. Pangloss (not Voltaire's, but Coleman's)

who speaks only in quotations; and the pith, the marrow of Sir James's

reasoning and rhetoric at that memorable period might be put within

inverted commas. It, however, served its purpose and the loud echo died

away. We remember an excellent man and a sound critic[A] going to hear

one of these elaborate effusions; and on his want of enthusiasm being

accounted for from its not being one of the orator's brilliant days, he

replied, "he did not think a man of genius could speak for two hours

without saying something by which he would have been electrified."

We are only sorry, at this distance of time, for one thing in these

Lectures--the tone and spirit in which they seemed to have been composed

and to be delivered. If all that body of opinions and principles of

which the orator read his recantation was unfounded, and there was an

end of all those views and hopes that pointed to future improvement, it

was not a matter of triumph or exultation to the lecturer or any body

else, to the young or the old, the wise or the foolish; on the contrary,

it was a subject of regret, of slow, reluctant, painful admission--

"Of lamentation loud heard through the rueful air."

The Spirit of the Age; Or, Contemporary Portraits · 第 9 / 19 段