"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this
sign, that the DUNCES are all in confederacy against him."--_Swift_.
How shall we know the dunces from the man of genius, who is no doubt
our superior in judgment, yet knows himself for a fool--by the
proverb?
At least, my dear Doctor, you will let me, with the mass of readers,
have clearer wits than the dunces--then why should I not know what
you are as soon as, or sooner than Bavius, &c.--unless a dunce has a
good nose, or a natural instinct for detecting wit.
Now I take it that these people stigmatized as dunces are but men of
ill-balanced mental faculties, yet perhaps, in a great degree,
superior to the average of minds. For instance, a poet of much merit,
but more ambition, has written the "Lampiad," an epic; when he should
not have dared beyond the Doric reed: his ambitious pride has
prevented the publication of excellent pastorals, therefore the world
only knows him for his failure. This, I say, is a likely man to
become a detractor; for his good judgment shows the imperfections of
most works, his own included; his ambition (an ill-combination of
self-conscious worth and spleen) leads him to compare works of the
highest repute; the works of contemporaries; and his own. In all
cases where success is most difficult, he will be most severe; this
naturally leads him to criticise the very best works.
He has himself failed; he sees errors in successful writers; he knows
he possesses certain merits, and knows what the perfection of them
should be. This is the ground work of envy, which makes a man of
parts a comparative fool, and a confederate against "true genius."