DRYDEN.[1]

Benvenuto Cellini tells us that when, in his boyhood, he saw a salamander

come out of the fire, his grandfather forthwith gave him a sound beating,

that he might the better remember so unique a prodigy. Though perhaps in

this case the rod had another application than the autobiographer chooses

to disclose, and was intended to fix in the pupil's mind a lesson of

veracity rather than of science, the testimony to its mnemonic virtue

remains. Nay, so universally was it once believed that the senses, and

through them the faculties of observation and retention, were quickened

by an irritation of the cuticle, that in France it was customary to whip

the children annually at the boundaries of the parish, lest the true

place of them might ever be lost through neglect of so inexpensive a

mordant for the memory. From this practice the older school of critics

would seem to have taken a hint for keeping fixed the limits of good

taste, and what was somewhat vaguely called _classical_ English. To mark

these limits in poetry, they set up as Hermae the images they had made to

them of Dryden, of Pope, and later of Goldsmith. Here they solemnly

castigated every new aspirant in verse, who in turn performed the same

function for the next generation, thus helping to keep always sacred and

immovable the _ne plus ultra_ alike of inspiration and of the vocabulary.

Though no two natures were ever much more unlike than those of Dryden and

Pope, and again of Pope and Goldsmith, and no two styles, except in such

externals as could be easily caught and copied, yet it was the fashion,

down even to the last generation, to advise young writers to form

themselves, as it was called, on these excellent models. Wordsworth

himself began in this school; and though there were glimpses, here and

there, of a direct study of nature, yet most of the epithets in his

earlier pieces were of the traditional kind so fatal to poetry during

great part of the last century; and he indulged in that alphabetic

personification which enlivens all such words as Hunger, Solitude,

Freedom, by the easy magic of an initial capital.

"Where the green apple shrivels on the spray,

And pines the unripened pear in summer's kindliest ray,

Even here Content has fixed her smiling reign

With Independence, child of high Disdain.

Exulting 'mid the winter of the skies,

Shy as the jealous chamois, Freedom flies,

And often grasps her sword, and often eyes."

Here we have every characteristic of the artificial method, even to the

triplet, which Swift hated so heartily as "a vicious way of rhyming

wherewith Mr. Dryden abounded, imitated by all the bad versifiers of

Charles the Second's reign." Wordsworth became, indeed, very early the

leader of reform; but, like Wesley, he endeavored a reform within the

Establishment. Purifying the substance, he retained the outward forms

with a feeling rather than conviction that, in poetry, substance and form

are but manifestations of the same inward life, the one fused into the

other in the vivid heat of their common expression. Wordsworth could

never wholly shake off the influence of the century into which he was

born. He began by proposing a reform of the ritual, but it went no

further than an attempt to get rid of the words of Latin original where

the meaning was as well or better given in derivatives of the Saxon. He

would have stricken out the "assemble" and left the "meet together." Like

Wesley, he might be compelled by necessity to a breach of the canon; but,

like him, he was never a willing schismatic, and his singing robes were

the full and flowing canonicals of the church by law established.

Inspiration makes short work with the usage of the best authors and

ready-made elegances of diction; but where Wordsworth is not possessed by

his demon, as Molière said of Corneille, he equals Thomson in verbiage,

out-Miltons Milton in artifice of style, and Latinizes his diction beyond

Dryden. The fact was, that he took up his early opinions on instinct, and

insensibly modified them as he studied the masters of what may be called

the Middle Period of English verse.[2] As a young man, he disparaged

Virgil ("We talked a great deal of nonsense in those days," he said when

taken to task for it later in life); at fifty-nine he translated three

books of the Aeneid, in emulation of Dryden, though falling far short of

him in everything but closeness, as he seems, after a few years, to have

been convinced. Keats was the first resolute and wilful heretic, the true

founder of the modern school, which admits no cis-Elizabethan authority

save Milton, whose own English was formed upon those earlier models.

Keats denounced the authors of that style which came in toward the close

of the seventeenth century, and reigned absolute through the whole of the

eighteenth, as

"A schism,

Nurtured by foppery and barbarism,

... who went about

Holding a poor decrepit standard out,

Marked with most flimsy mottoes, and in large

The name of one Boileau!"

But Keats had never then[3] studied the writers of whom he speaks so

contemptuously, though he might have profited by so doing. Boileau would

at least have taught him that _flimsy_ would have been an apter epithet

for the _standard_ than for the mottoes upon it. Dryden was the author of

that schism against which Keats so vehemently asserts the claim of the

orthodox teaching it had displaced. He was far more just to Boileau, of

whom Keats had probably never read a word. "If I would only cross the

seas," he says, "I might find in France a living Horace and a Juvenal in

the person of the admirable Boileau, whose numbers are excellent, whose

expressions are noble, whose thoughts are just, whose language is pure,

whose satire is pointed, and whose sense is just. What he borrows from

the ancients he repays with usury of his own, in coin as good and almost

as universally valuable."[4]

Dryden has now been in his grave nearly a hundred and seventy years; in

the second class of English poets perhaps no one stands, on the whole, so

high as he; during his lifetime, in spite of jealousy, detraction,

unpopular politics, and a suspicious change of faith, his pre-eminence

was conceded; he was the earliest complete type of the purely literary

man, in the modern sense; there is a singular unanimity in allowing him a

certain claim to _greatness_ which would be denied to men as famous and

more read,--to Pope or Swift, for example; he is supposed, in some way or

other, to have reformed English poetry. It is now about half a century

since the only uniform edition of his works was edited by Scott. No

library is complete without him, no name is more familiar than his, and

yet it may be suspected that few writers are more thoroughly buried in

that great cemetery of the "British Poets." If contemporary reputation be

often deceitful, posthumous fame may be generally trusted, for it is a

verdict made up of the suffrages of the select men in succeeding

generations. This verdict has been as good as unanimous in favor of

Dryden. It is, perhaps, worth while to take a fresh observation of him,

to consider him neither as warning nor example, but to endeavor to make

out what it is that has given so lofty and firm a position to one of the

most unequal, inconsistent, and faulty writers that ever lived. He is a

curious example of what we often remark of the living, but rarely of the

dead,--that they get credit for what they might be quite as much as for

what they are,--and posterity has applied to him one of his own rules of

criticism, judging him by the best rather than the average of his

achievement, a thing posterity is seldom wont to do. On the losing side

in politics, it is true of his polemical writings as of Burke's,--whom in

many respects he resembles, and especially in that supreme quality of a

reasoner, that his mind gathers not only heat, but clearness and

expansion, by its own motion,--that they have won his battle for him in

the judgment of after times.

To us, looking back at him, he gradually becomes a singularly interesting

and even picturesque figure. He is, in more senses than one, in language,

in turn of thought, in style of mind, in the direction of his activity,

the first of the moderns. He is the first literary man who was also a man

of the world, as we understand the term. He succeeded Ben Jonson as the

acknowledged dictator of wit and criticism, as Dr. Johnson, after nearly

the same interval, succeeded him. All ages are, in some sense, ages of

transition; but there are times when the transition is more marked, more

rapid; and it is, perhaps, an ill fortune for a man of letters to arrive

at maturity during such a period, still more to represent in himself the

change that is going on, and to be an efficient cause in bringing it

about. Unless, like Goethe, he is of a singularly uncontemporaneous

nature, capable of being _tutta in se romita_, and of running parallel

with his time rather than being sucked into its current, he will be

thwarted in that harmonious development of native force which has so much

to do with its steady and successful application. Dryden suffered, no

doubt, in this way. Though in creed he seems to have drifted backward in

an eddy of the general current; yet of the intellectual movement of the

time, so far certainly as literature shared in it, he could say, with

Aeneas, not only that he saw, but that himself was a great part of it.

That movement was, on the whole, a downward one, from faith to

scepticism, from enthusiasm to cynicism, from the imagination to the

understanding. It was in a direction altogether away from those springs

of imagination and faith at which they of the last age had slaked the

thirst or renewed the vigor of their souls. Dryden himself recognized

that indefinable and gregarious influence which we call nowadays the

Spirit of the Age, when he said that "every Age has a kind of universal

Genius."[5] He had also a just notion of that in which he lived; for he

remarks, incidentally, that "all knowing ages are naturally sceptic and

not at all bigoted, which, if I am not much deceived, is the proper

character of our own."[6] It may be conceived that he was even painfully

half-aware of having fallen upon a time incapable, not merely of a great

poet, but perhaps of any poet at all; for nothing is so sensitive to the

chill of a sceptical atmosphere as that enthusiasm which, if it be not

genius, is at least the beautiful illusion that saves it from the

baffling quibbles of self-consciousness. Thrice unhappy he who, horn to

see things as they might be, is schooled by circumstances to see them as

people say they are,--to read God in a prose translation. Such was

Dryden's lot, and such, for a good part of his days, it was by his own

choice. He who was of a stature to snatch the torch of life that flashes

from lifted hand to hand along the generations, over the heads of

inferior men, chose rather to be a link-boy to the stews.

As a writer for the stage, he deliberately adopted and repeatedly

reaffirmed the maxim that

"He who lives to please, must please to live."

Without earnest convictions, no great or sound literature is conceivable.

But if Dryden mostly wanted that inspiration which comes of belief in and

devotion to something nobler and more abiding than the present moment and

its petulant need, he had, at least, the next best thing to that,--a

thorough faith in himself. He was, moreover, a man of singularly open

soul, and of a temper self-confident enough to be candid even with

himself. His mind was growing to the last, his judgment widening and

deepening, his artistic sense refining itself more and more. He confessed

his errors, and was not ashamed to retrace his steps in search of that

better knowledge which the omniscience of superficial study had

disparaged. Surely an intellect that is still pliable at seventy is a

phenomenon as interesting as it is rare. But at whatever period of his

life we look at Dryden, and whatever, for the moment, may have been his

poetic creed, there was something in the nature of the man that would not

be wholly subdued to what it worked in. There are continual glimpses of

something in him greater than he, hints of possibilities finer than

anything he has done. You feel that the whole of him was better than any

random specimens, though of his best, seem to prove. _Incessu patet_, he

has by times the large stride of the elder race, though it sinks too

often into the slouch of a man who has seen better days. His grand air

may, in part, spring from a habit of easy superiority to his competitors;

but must also, in part, be ascribed to an innate dignity of character.

That this pre-eminence should have been so generally admitted, during his

life, can only be explained by a bottom of good sense, kindliness, and

sound judgment, whose solid worth could afford that many a flurry of

vanity, petulance, and even error should flit across the surface and be

forgotten. Whatever else Dryden may have been, the last and abiding

impression of him is, that he was thoroughly manly; and while it may be

disputed whether he was a great poet, it may be said of him, as

Wordsworth said of Burke, that "he was by far the greatest man of his

age, not only abounding in knowledge himself, but feeding, in various

directions, his most able contemporaries."[7]

Dryden was born in 1631. He was accordingly six years old when Jonson

died, was nearly a quarter of a century younger than Milton, and may have

personally known Bishop Hall, the first English satirist, who was living

till 1656. On the other side, he was older than Swift by thirty-six, than

Addison by forty-one, and than Pope by fifty-seven years. Dennis says

that "Dryden, for the last ten years of his life, was much acquainted

with Addison, and drank with him more than he ever used to do, probably

so far as to hasten his end," being commonly "an extreme sober man." Pope

tell us that, in his twelfth year, he "saw Dryden," perhaps at Will's,

perhaps in the street, as Scott did Burns. Dryden himself visited Milton

now and then, and was intimate with Davenant, who could tell him of

Fletcher and Jonson from personal recollection. Thus he stands between

the age before and that which followed him, giving a hand to each. His

father was a country clergyman, of Puritan leanings, a younger son of an

ancient county family. The Puritanism is thought to have come in with the

poet's great-grandfather, who made in his will the somewhat singular

statement that he was "assured by the Holy Ghost that he was elect of

God." It would appear from this that Dryden's self-confidence was an

inheritance. The solid quality of his mind showed itself early. He

himself tells us that he had read Polybius "in English, with the pleasure

of a boy, before he was ten years of age, and yet even then _had some

dark notions of the prudence with which he conducted his design_."[8] The

concluding words are very characteristic, even if Dryden, as men commonly

do, interpreted his boyish turn of mind by later self-knowledge. We thus

get a glimpse of him browsing--for, like Johnson, Burke, and the full as

distinguished from the learned men, he was always a random reader[9]--in

his father's library, and painfully culling here and there a spray of his

own proper nutriment from among the stubs and thorns of Puritan divinity.

After such schooling as could be had in the country, he was sent up to

Westminster School, then under the headship of the celebrated Dr. Busby.

Here he made his first essays in verse, translating, among other school

exercises of the same kind, the third satire of Persius. In 1650 he was

entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, and remained there for seven

years. The only record of his college life is a discipline imposed, in

1652, for "disobedience to the Vice-Master, and contumacy in taking his

punishment, inflicted by him." Whether this punishment was corporeal, as

Johnson insinuates in the similar case of Milton, we are ignorant. He

certainly retained no very fond recollection of his Alma Mater, for in

his "Prologue to the University of Oxford," he says:--

"Oxford to him a dearer name shall be

Than his own mother university;

Thebes did his green, unknowing youth engage,

He chooses Athens in his riper age."

By the death of his father, in 1654, he came into possession of a small

estate of sixty pounds a year, from which, however, a third must be

deducted, for his mother's dower, till 1676. After leaving Cambridge, he

became secretary to his near relative, Sir Gilbert Pickering, at that

time Cromwell's chamberlain, and a member of his Upper House. In 1670 he

succeeded Davenant as Poet Laureate,[10] and Howell as Historiographer,

with a yearly salary of two hundred pounds. This place he lost at the

Revolution, and had the mortification to see his old enemy and butt,

Shadwell, promoted to it, as the best poet the Whig party could muster.

If William was obliged to read the verses of his official minstrel,

Dryden was more than avenged. From 1688 to his death, twelve years later,

he earned his bread manfully by his pen, without any mean complaining,

and with no allusion to his fallen fortunes that is not dignified and

touching. These latter years, during which he was his own man again, were

probably the happiest of his life. In 1664 or 1665 he married Lady

Elizabeth Howard, daughter of the Earl of Berkshire. About a hundred

pounds a year were thus added to his income. The marriage is said not to

have been a happy one, and perhaps it was not, for his wife was

apparently a weak-minded woman; but the inference from the internal

evidence of Dryden's plays, as of Shakespeare's, is very untrustworthy,

ridicule of marriage having always been a common stock in trade of the

comic writers.

The earliest of his verses that have come down to us were written upon

the death of Lord Hastings, and are as bad as they can be,--a kind of

parody on the worst of Donne. They have every fault of his manner,

without a hint of the subtile and often profound thought that more than

redeems it. As the Doctor himself would have said, here is Donne outdone.

The young nobleman died of the small-pox, and Dryden exclaims

pathetically,--

"Was there no milder way than the small-pox,

The very filthiness of Pandora's box?"

He compares the pustules to "rosebuds stuck i' the lily skin about," and

says that

"Each little pimple had a tear in it

To wail the fault its rising did commit."

But he has not done his worst yet, by a great deal. What follows is even

finer:--

"No comet need foretell his change drew on,

Whose corpse might seem a constellation.

O, had he died of old, how great a strife

Had been who from his death should draw their life!

Who should, by one rich draught, become whate'er

Seneca, Cato, Numa, Caesar, were,

Learned, virtuous, pious, great, and have by this

An universal metempsychosis!

Must all these aged sires in one funeral

Expire? all die in one so young, so small?"

It is said that one of Allston's early pictures was brought to him, after

he had long forgotten it, and his opinion asked as to the wisdom of the

young artist's persevering in the career he had chosen. Allston advised

his quitting it forthwith as hopeless. Could the same experiment have

been tried with these verses upon Dryden, can any one doubt that his

counsel would have been the same? It should be remembered, however, that

he was barely turned eighteen when they were written, and the tendency of

his style is noticeable in so early an abandonment of the participial

_ed_ in _learned_ and _aged_. In the next year he appears again in some

commendatory verses prefixed to the sacred epigrams of his friend, John

Hoddesdon. In these he speaks of the author as a

"Young eaglet, who, thy nest thus soon forsook,

So lofty and divine a course hast took

As all admire, before the down begin

To peep, as yet, upon thy smoother chin."

Here is almost every fault which Dryden's later nicety would have

condemned. But perhaps there is no schooling so good for an author as his

own youthful indiscretions. After this effort Dryden seems to have lain

fallow for ten years, and then he at length reappears in thirty-seven

"heroic stanzas" on the death of Cromwell. The versification is smoother,

but the conceits are there again, though in a milder form. The verse is

modelled after "Gondibert." A single image from nature (he was almost

always happy in these) gives some hint of the maturer Dryden:--

"And wars, like mists that rise against the sun,

Made him but greater seem, not greater grow."

Two other verses,

"And the isle, when her protecting genius went,

Upon his obsequies loud sighs conferred,"

are interesting, because they show that he had been studying the early

poems of Milton. He has contrived to bury under a rubbish of verbiage one

of the most purely imaginative passages ever written by the great Puritan

poet.

"From haunted spring and dale,

Edged with poplar pale,

The parting genius is with sighing sent."

This is the more curious because, twenty-four years afterwards, he says,

in defending rhyme: "Whatever causes he [Milton] alleges for the

abolishment of rhyme, his own particular reason is plainly this, that

rhyme was not his talent; he had neither the ease of doing it nor the

graces of it: which is manifest in his _Juvenilia_, ... where his rhyme

is always constrained and forced, and comes hardly from him, at an age

when the soul is most pliant, and the passion of love makes almost every

man a rhymer, though not a poet."[11] It was this, no doubt, that

heartened Dr. Johnson to say of "Lycidas" that "the diction was harsh,

the rhymes uncertain, and the numbers unpleasing." It is Dryden's excuse

that his characteristic excellence is to argue persuasively and

powerfully, whether in verse or prose, and that he was amply endowed with

the most needful quality of an advocate,--to be always strongly and

wholly of his present way of thinking, whatever it might be. Next we

have, in 1660, "Astraea Redux" on the "happy restoration" of Charles II.

In this also we can forebode little of the full-grown Dryden but his

defects. We see his tendency to exaggeration, and to confound physical

with metaphysical, as where he says of the ships that brought home the

royal brothers, that

"The joyful London meets

The princely York, himself alone a freight,

The Swiftsure groans beneath great Gloster's weight"

and speaks of the

"Repeated prayer

Which stormed the skies and ravished Charles from thence."

There is also a certain everydayness, not to say vulgarity, of phrase,

which Dryden never wholly refined away, and which continually tempts us

to sum up at once against him as the greatest poet that ever was or could

be made wholly out of prose.

"Heaven would no bargain for its blessings drive"

is an example. On the other hand, there are a few verses almost worthy of

his best days, as these:--

"Some lazy ages lost in sleep and ease,

No action leave to busy chronicles;

Such whose _supine felicity_ but makes

In story chasms, in epochas mistakes,

O'er whom Time gently shakes his wings of down,

Till with his silent sickle they are mown,"

These are all the more noteworthy, that Dryden, unless in argument, is

seldom equal for six lines together. In the poem to Lord Clarendon (1662)

there are four verses that have something of the "energy divine" for

which Pope praised his master.

"Let envy, then, those crimes within you see

From which the happy never must be free;

Envy that does with misery reside,

The joy and the revenge of ruined pride."

In his "Aurengzebe" (1675) there is a passage, of which, as it is a good

example of Dryden, I shall quote the whole, though my purpose aims mainly

at the latter verses:--

"When I consider life, 't is all a cheat;

Yet, fooled with Hope, men favor the deceit,

Trust on, and think to-morrow will repay;

To-morrow's falser than the former day,

Lies worse, and, while it says we shall be blest

With some new joys, cuts off what we possest.

Strange cozenage! none would live past years again,

Yet all hope pleasure in what yet remain,

And from the dregs of life think to receive

What the first sprightly running could not give.

I'm tired of waiting for this chymic gold

Which fools us young and beggars us when old."

The "first sprightly running" of Dryden's vintage was, it must be

confessed, a little muddy, if not beery; but if his own soil did not

produce grapes of the choicest flavor, he knew where they were to be had;

and his product, like sound wine, grew better the longer it stood upon

the lees. He tells us, evidently thinking of himself, that in a poet,

"from fifty to threescore, the balance generally holds even in our colder

climates, for he loses not much in fancy, and judgment, which is the

effect of observation, still increases. His succeeding years afford him

little more than the stubble of his own harvest, yet, if his constitution

be healthful, his mind may still retain a decent vigor, and the gleanings

of that of Ephraim, in comparison with others, will surpass the vintage

of Abiezer."[12] Since Chaucer, none of our poets has had a constitution

more healthful, and it was his old age that yielded the best of him. In

him the understanding was, perhaps, in overplus for his entire good

fortune as a poet, and that is a faculty among the earliest to mature. We

have seen him, at only ten years, divining the power of reason in

Polybius.[13] The same turn of mind led him later to imitate the French

school of tragedy, and to admire in Ben Jonson the most correct of

English poets. It was his imagination that needed quickening, and it is

very curious to trace through his different prefaces the gradual opening

of his eyes to the causes of the solitary pre-eminence of Shakespeare. At

first he is sensible of an attraction towards him which he cannot

explain, and for which he apologizes, as if it were wrong. But he feels

himself drawn more and more strongly, till at last he ceases to resist

altogether, and is forced to acknowledge that there is something in this

one man that is not and never was anywhere else, something not to be

reasoned about, ineffable, divine; if contrary to the rules, so much the

worse for _them_. It may be conjectured that Dryden's Puritan

associations may have stood in the way of his more properly poetic

culture, and that his early knowledge of Shakespeare was slight. He tells

us that Davenant, whom he could not have known before he himself was

twenty-seven, first taught him to admire the great poet. But even after

his imagination had become conscious of its prerogative, and his

expression had been ennobled by frequenting this higher society, we find

him continually dropping back into that _sermo pedestris_ which seems, on

the whole, to have been his more natural element. We always feel his

epoch in him, that he was the lock which let our language down from its

point of highest poetry to its level of easiest and most gently flowing

prose. His enthusiasm needs the contagion of other minds to arouse it;

but his strong sense, his command of the happy word, his wit, which is

distinguished by a certain breadth and, as it were, power of

generalization, as Pope's by keenness of edge and point, were his,

whether he would or no. Accordingly, his poetry is often best and his

verse more flowing where (as in parts of his version of the twenty-ninth

ode of the third book of Horace) he is amplifying the suggestions of

another mind.[14] Viewed from one side, he justifies Milton's remark of

him, that "he was a good rhymist, but no poet." To look at all sides, and

to distrust the verdict of a single mood, is, no doubt, the duty of a

critic. But how if a certain side be so often presented as to thrust

forward in the memory and disturb it in the effort to recall that total

impression (for the office of a critic is not, though often so

misunderstood, to say _guilty_ or _not guilty_ of some particular fact)

which is the only safe ground of judgment? It is the weight of the whole

man, not of one or the other limb of him, that we want. _Expende

Hannibalem_. Very good, but not in a scale capacious only of a single

quality at a time, for it is their union, and not their addition, that

assures the value of each separately. It was not this or that which gave

him his weight in council, his swiftness of decision in battle that

outran the forethought of other men,--it was Hannibal. But this prosaic

element in Dryden will force itself upon me. As I read him, I cannot help

thinking of an ostrich, to be classed with flying things, and capable,

what with leap and flap together, of leaving the earth for a longer or

shorter space, but loving the open plain, where wing and foot help each

other to something that is both flight and run at once. What with his

haste and a certain dash, which, according to our mood, we may call

florid or splendid, he seems to stand among poets where Rubens does among

painters,--greater, perhaps, as a colorist than an artist, yet great here

also, if we compare him with any but the first.

We have arrived at Dryden's thirty-second year, and thus far have found

little in him to warrant an augury that he was ever to be one of the

_great_ names in English literature, the most perfect type, that is, of

his class, and that class a high one, though not the highest. If Joseph

de Maistre's axiom, _Qui n'a pas vaincu à trente ans, ne vaincra jamais_,

were true, there would be little hope of him, for he has won no battle

yet. But there is something solid and doughty in the man, that can rise

from defeat, the stuff of which victories are made in due time, when we

are able to choose our position better, and the sun is at our back.

Hitherto his performances have been mainly of the _obbligato_ sort, at

which few men of original force are good, least of all Dryden, who had

always something of stiffness in his strength. Waller had praised the

living Cromwell in perhaps the manliest verses he ever wrote,--not _very_

manly, to be sure, but really elegant, and, on the whole, better than

those in which Dryden squeezed out melodious tears. Waller, who had also

made himself conspicuous as a volunteer Antony to the country squire

turned Caesar,

("With ermine clad and purple, let him hold

A royal sceptre made of Spanish gold,")

was more servile than Dryden in hailing the return of _ex officio_

Majesty. He bewails to Charles, in snuffling heroics,

"Our sorrow and our crime

To have accepted life so long a time,

Without you here."

A weak man, put to the test by rough and angry times, as Waller was, may

be pitied, but meanness is nothing but contemptible under any

circumstances. If it be true that "every conqueror creates a Muse,"

Cromwell was unfortunate. Even Milton's sonnet, though dignified, is

reserved if not distrustful. Marvell's "Horatian Ode," the most truly

classic in our language, is worthy of its theme. The same poet's Elegy,

in parts noble, and everywhere humanly tender, is worth more than all

Carlyle's biography as a witness to the gentler qualities of the hero,

and of the deep affection that stalwart nature could inspire in hearts of

truly masculine temper. As it is little known, a few verses of it may be

quoted to show the difference between grief that thinks of its object and

grief that thinks of its rhymes:--

"Valor, religion, friendship, prudence died

At once with him, and all that's good beside,

And we, death's refuse, nature's dregs, confined

To loathsome life, alas! are left behind.

Where we (so once we used) shall now no more,

To fetch day, press about his chamber-door,

No more shall hear that powerful language charm,

Whose force oft spared the labor of his arm,

No more shall follow where he spent the days

In war or counsel, or in prayer and praise.

* * * * *

I saw him dead; a leaden slumber lies,

And mortal sleep, over those wakeful eyes;

Those gentle rays under the lids were fled,

Which through his looks that piercing sweetness shed;

That port, which so majestic was and strong,

Loose and deprived of vigor stretched along,

All withered, all discolored, pale, and wan,

How much another thing! no more That Man!

O human glory! vain! O death! O wings!

O worthless world! O transitory things!

Yet dwelt that greatness in his shape decayed

That still, though dead, greater than Death he laid,

And, in his altered face, you something feign

That threatens Death he yet will live again."

Such verses might not satisfy Lindley Murray, but they are of that higher

mood which satisfies the heart. These couplets, too, have an energy

worthy of Milton's friend:--

"When up the armëd mountains of Dunbar

He marched, and through deep Severn, ending war."

"Thee, many ages hence, in martial verse

Shall the English soldier, ere he charge, rehearse."

On the whole, one is glad that Dryden's panegyric on the Protector was so

poor. It was purely official verse-making. Had there been any feeling in

it, there had been baseness in his address to Charles. As it is, we may

fairly assume that he was so far sincere in both cases as to be thankful

for a chance to exercise himself in rhyme, without much caring whether

upon a funeral or a restoration. He might naturally enough expect that

poetry would have a better chance under Charles than under Cromwell, or

any successor with Commonwealth principles. Cromwell had more serious

matters to think about than verses, while Charles might at least care as

much about them as it was in his base good-nature to care about anything

but loose women and spaniels. Dryden's sound sense, afterwards so

conspicuous, shows itself even in these pieces, when we can get at it

through the tangled thicket of tropical phrase. But the authentic and

unmistakable Dryden first manifests himself in some verses addressed to

his friend Dr. Charlton in 1663. We have first his common sense which has

almost the point of wit, yet with a tang of prose:--

"The longest tyranny that ever swayed

Was that wherein our ancestors betrayed

Their freeborn reason to the Stagyrite,

And made his torch their universal light.

_So truth, while only one supplied the state,

Grew scarce and dear and yet sophisticate.

Still it was bought, like emp'ric wares or charms,

Hard words sealed up with Aristotle's arms_."

Then we have his graceful sweetness of fancy, where he speaks of the

inhabitants of the New World:--

"Guiltless men who danced away their time,

Fresh as their groves and happy as their clime."

And, finally, there is a hint of imagination where "mighty visions of the

Danish race" watch round Charles sheltered in Stonehenge after the battle

of Worcester. These passages might have been written by the Dryden whom

we learn to know fifteen years later. They have the advantage that he

wrote them to please himself. His contemporary, Dr. Heylin, said of

French cooks, that "their trade was not to feed the belly, but the

palate." Dryden was a great while in learning this secret, as available

in good writing as in cookery. He strove after it, but his thoroughly

English nature, to the last, would too easily content itself with serving

up the honest beef of his thought, without regard to daintiness of flavor

in the dressing of it.[15] Of the best English poetry, it might be said

that it is understanding aërated by imagination. In Dryden the solid part

too often refused to mix kindly with the leaven, either remaining lumpish

or rising to a hasty puffiness. Grace and lightness were with him much

more a laborious achievement than a natural gift, and it is all the more

remarkable that he should so often have attained to what seems such an

easy perfection in both. Always a hasty writer,[16] he was long in

forming his style, and to the last was apt to snatch the readiest word

rather than wait for the fittest. He was not wholly and unconsciously

poet, but a thinker who sometimes lost himself on enchanted ground and

was transfigured by its touch. This preponderance in him of the reasoning

over the intuitive faculties, the one always there, the other flashing in

when you least expect it, accounts for that inequality and even

incongruousness in his writing which makes one revise his judgment at

every tenth page. In his prose you come upon passages that persuade you

he is a poet, in spite of his verses so often turning state's evidence

against him as to convince you he is none. He is a prose-writer, with a

kind of Aeolian attachment. For example, take this bit of prose from the

dedication of his version of Virgil's Pastorals, 1694: "He found the

strength of his genius betimes, and was even in his youth preluding to

his Georgicks and his Aeneis. He could not forbear to try his wings,

though his pinions were not hardened to maintain a long, laborious

flight; yet sometimes they bore him to a pitch as lofty as ever he was

able to reach afterwards. But when he was admonished by his subject to

descend, he came down gently circling in the air and singing to the

ground, like a lark melodious in her mounting and continuing her song

till she alights, still preparing for a higher flight at her next sally,

and tuning her voice to better music." This is charming, and yet even

this wants the ethereal tincture that pervades the style of Jeremy

Taylor, making it, as Burke said of Sheridan's eloquence, "neither prose

nor poetry, but something better than either." Let us compare Taylor's

treatment of the same image: "For so have I seen a lark rising from his

bed of grass and soaring upwards, singing as he rises, and hopes to get

to heaven and climb above the clouds; but the poor bird was beaten back

by the loud sighings of an eastern wind, and his motion made irregular

and inconstant, descending more at every breath of the tempest than it

could recover by the libration and frequent weighing of his wings, till

the little creature was forced to sit down and pant, and stay till the

storm was over, and then it made a prosperous flight, and did rise and

sing as if it had learned music and motion of an angel as he passed

sometimes through the air about his ministries here below." Taylor's

fault is that his sentences too often smell of the library, but what an

open air is here! How unpremeditated it all seems! How carelessly he

knots each new thought, as it comes, to the one before it with an _and_,

like a girl making lace! And what a slidingly musical use he makes of the

sibilants with which our language is unjustly taxed by those who can only

make them hiss, not sing! There are twelve of them in the first twenty

words, fifteen of which are monsyllables. We notice the structure of

Dryden's periods, but this grows up as we read. It gushes, like the song

of the bird itself,--

"In profuse strains of unpremeditated art."

Let us now take a specimen of Dryden's bad prose from one of his poems. I

open the "Annus Mirabilis" at random, and hit upon this:--

'Our little fleet was now engaged so far,

That, like the swordfish in the whale, they fought.

The combat only seemed a civil war,

Till through their bowels we our passage wrought.'

Is this Dryden, or Sternhold, or Shadwell, those Toms who made him say

that "dulness was fatal to the name of Tom"? The natural history of

Goldsmith in the verse of Pye! His thoughts did not "voluntary move

harmonious numbers." He had his choice between prose and verse, and seems

to be poetical on second thought. I do not speak without book. He was

more than half conscious of it himself. In the same letter to Mrs.

Steward, just cited, he says, "I am still drudging on, always a poet and

never a good one"; and this from no mock-modesty, for he is always

handsomely frank in telling us whatever of his own doing pleased him.

This was written in the last year of his life, and at about the same time

he says elsewhere: "What judgment I had increases rather than diminishes,

and thoughts, such as they are, come crowding in so fast upon me that my

only difficulty is to choose or to reject, to run them into verse or to

give them the other harmony of prose; I have so long studied and

practised both, that they are grown into a habit and become familiar to

me."[17] I think that a man who was primarily a poet would hardly have

felt this equanimity of choice.

I find a confirmation of this feeling about Dryden in his early literary

loves. His taste was not an instinct, but the slow result of reflection

and of the manfulness with which he always acknowledged to himself his

own mistakes. In this latter respect few men deal so magnanimously with

themselves as he, and accordingly few have been so happily inconsistent.

_Ancora imparo_ might have served him for a motto as well as Michael

Angelo. His prefaces are a complete log of his life, and the habit of

writing them was a useful one to him, for it forced him to think with a

pen in his hand, which, according to Goethe, "if it do no other good,

keeps the mind from staggering about." In these prefaces we see his taste

gradually rising from Du Bartas to Spenser, from Cowley to Milton, from

Corneille to Shakespeare. "I remember when I was a boy," he says in his

dedication of the "Spanish Friar," 1681, "I thought inimitable Spenser a

mean poet in comparison of Sylvester's _Du Bartas_, and was rapt into an

ecstasy when I read these lines:--

'Now when the winter's keener breath began

To crystallize the Baltic ocean,

To glaze the lakes, to bridle up the floods,

And periwig with snow[18] the baldpate woods.'

I am much deceived if this be not abominable fustian." Swift, in his

"Tale of a Tub," has a ludicrous passage in this style: "Look on this

globe of earth, you will find it to be a very complete and fashionable

dress. What is that which some call _land_, but a fine coat faced with

green? or the _sea_, but a waistcoat of water-tabby? Proceed to the

particular works of creation, you will find how curious journeyman Nature

has been to trim up the vegetable _beaux_; observe how _sparkish a

periwig adorns the head of a beech_, and what a fine doublet of white

satin is worn by the birch." The fault is not in any inaptness of the

images, nor in the mere vulgarity of the things themselves, but in that

of the associations they awaken. The "prithee, undo this button" of Lear,

coming where it does and expressing what it does, is one of those touches

of the pathetically sublime, of which only Shakespeare ever knew the

secret. Herrick, too, has a charming poem on "Julia's petticoat," the

charm being that he lifts the familiar and the low to the region of

sentiment. In the passage from Sylvester, it is precisely the reverse,

and the wig takes as much from the sentiment as it adds to a Lord

Chancellor. So Pope's proverbial verse,

"True wit is Nature to advantage drest,"

unpleasantly suggests Nature under the hands of a lady's-maid.[19] We

have no word in English that will exactly define this want of propriety

in diction. _Vulgar_ is too strong, and _commonplace_ too weak. Perhaps

_bourgeois_ comes as near as any. It is to be noticed that Dryden does

not unequivocally condemn the passage he quotes, but qualifies it with an

"if I am not much mistaken." Indeed, though his judgment in substantials,

like that of Johnson, is always worth having, his taste, the negative

half of genius, never altogether refined itself from a colloquial

familiarity, which is one of the charms of his prose, and gives that air

of easy strength in which his satire is unmatched. In his "Royal Martyr"

(1669), the tyrant Maximin says to the gods:--

"Keep you your rain and sunshine in the skies,

And I'll keep back my flame and sacrifice;

_Your trade of Heaven shall soon be at a stand,

And all your goods lie dead upon your hand,_"--

a passage which has as many faults as only Dryden was capable of

committing, even to a false idiom forced by the last rhyme. The same

tyrant in dying exclaims:--

"And after thee I'll go,

Revenging still, and following e'en to th' other world my blow,

And, _shoving back this earth on which I sit,

I'll mount and scatter all the gods I hit._"

Among My Books. First Series · 第 10 / 28 题