[1] The Frightful is not the Terrible, though often confounded with it.
[2] See Introductory Discourse.
[3] There is one species of imitation, however, which, as having been
practised by some of the most original minds, and also sanctioned by the
ablest writers, demands at least a little consideration; namely, the
adoption of an attitude, provided it be employed to convey a different
thought. So far, indeed, as the imitation has been confined to a
suggestion, and the attitude adopted has been modified by the new subject,
to which it was transferred, by a distinct change of character and
expression, though with but little variation in the disposition of limbs,
we may not dissent; such imitations being virtually little more than
hints, since they end in thoughts either totally different from, or more
complete than, the first. This we do not condemn, for every Poet, as well
as Artist, knows that a thought so modified is of right his own. It is the
transplanting of a tree, not the borrowing of a seed, against which we
contend. But when writers justify the appropriation, of entire figures,
without any such change, we do not agree with them; and cannot but think
that the examples they have quoted, as in the Sacrifice at Lystra, by
Raffaelle, and the Baptism, by Poussin, will fully support our position.
The antique _basso rilievo_ which Raffaelle has introduced in the former,
being certainly imitated both as to lines and grouping, is so distinct,
both in character and form, from the surrounding figures, as to render
them a distinct people, and their very air reminds us of another age. We
cannot but believe we should have had a very different group, and far
superior in expression, had he given us a conception of his own. It would
at least have been in accordance with the rest, animated with the
superstitious enthusiasm of the surrounding crowd; and especially as
sacrificing Priests would they have been amazed and awe-stricken in the
living presence of a god, instead of personating, as in the present group,
the cold officials of the Temple, going through a stated task at the
shrine of their idol. In the figure by Poussin, which he borrowed from
Michael Angelo, the discrepancy is still greater. The original figure,
which was in the Cartoon at Pisa, (now known only by a print,) is that of
a warrior who has been suddenly roused from the act of bathing by the
sound of a trumpet; he has just leaped upon the bank, and, in his haste to
obey its summons, thrusts his foot through his garment. Nothing could be
more appropriate than the violence of this action; it is in unison with
the hurry and bustle of the occasion. And this is the figure which Poussin
(without the slightest change, if we recollect aright) has transferred to
the still and solemn scene in which John baptizes the Saviour. No one can
look at this figure without suspecting the plagiarism. Similar instances
may be found in his other works; as in the Plague of the Philistines,
where the Alcibiades of Raffaelle is coolly sauntering among the dead and
dying, and with as little relation to the infected multitude as if he were
still with Socrates in the School of Athens. In the same picture may be
found also one of the Apostles from the Cartoon of the Draught of Fishes:
and we may naturally ask what business he has there. And yet such
appropriations have been made to appear no thefts, simply because no
attempt seems to have been made at concealment! But theft, we must be
allowed to think, is still theft, whether committed in the dark, or in the
face of day. And the example is a dangerous one, inasmuch as it comes from
men who were not constrained to resort to such shifts by any poverty of
invention.
Akin to this is another and larger kind of borrowing, which, though it
cannot strictly be called copying; yet so evidently betrays a foreign
origin, as to produce the same effect. We allude to the adoption of the
peculiar lines, handling, and disposition of masses, &c., of any
particular master.
[4] First printed in 1821, in "The Idle Man," No. II p. 38.
[5] A feigned name.--_Editor_.