In the "Conquest of Grenada" (1670), we have:--

"This little loss in our vast body shews

So small, that half _have never heard the news;

Fame's out of breath e'er she can fly so far

To tell 'em all that you have e'er made war_."[20]

And in the same play,

"That busy thing,

_The soul, is packing up_, and just on wing

Like parting swallows when they seek the spring,"

where the last sweet verse curiously illustrates that inequality (poetry

on a prose background) which so often puzzles us in Dryden. Infinitely

worse is the speech of Almanzor to his mother's ghost:--

"I'll rush into the covert of the night

And pull thee backward by the shroud to light,

Or else I'll squeeze thee like a bladder there,

And make thee groan thyself away to air."

What wonder that Dryden should have been substituted for Davenant as the

butt of the "Rehearsal," and that the parody should have had such a run?

And yet it was Dryden who, in speaking of Persius, hit upon the happy

phrase of "boisterous metaphors";[21] it was Dryden who said of Cowley,

whom he elsewhere calls "the darling of my youth,"[22] that he was "sunk

in reputation because he could never forgive any conceit which came in

his way, but swept, like a drag-net, great and small."[23] But the

passages I have thus far cited as specimens of our poet's coarseness (for

poet he surely was _intus_, though not always _in cute_) were written

before he was forty, and he had an odd notion, suitable to his healthy

complexion, that poets on the whole improve after that date. Man at

forty, he says, "seems to be fully in his summer tropic, ... and I

believe that it will hold in all great poets that, though they wrote

before with a certain heat of genius which inspired them, yet that heat

was not perfectly digested."[24] But artificial heat is never to be

digested at all, as is plain in Dryden's case. He was a man who warmed

slowly, and, in his hurry to supply the market, forced his mind. The

result was the same after forty as before. In "Oedipus" (1679) we find,

"Not one bolt

Shall err from Thebes, but more be called for, more,

_New-moulded thunder of a larger size!_"

This play was written in conjunction with Lee, of whom Dryden relates[25]

that, when some one said to him, "It is easy enough to write like a

madman," he replied, "No, it is hard to write like a madman, but easy

enough to write like a fool,"--perhaps the most compendious lecture on

poetry ever delivered. The splendid bit of eloquence, which has so much

the sheet-iron clang of impeachment thunder (I hope that Dryden is not in

the Library of Congress!) is perhaps Lee's. The following passage almost

certainly is his:--

"Sure 'tis the end of all things! Fate has torn

The lock of Time off, and his head is now

The ghastly ball of round Eternity!"

But the next, in which the soul is likened to the pocket of an indignant

housemaid charged with theft, is wholly in Dryden's manner:--

"No; I dare challenge heaven to turn me outward,

And shake my soul quite empty in your sight."

In the same style, he makes his Don Sebastian (1690) say that he is as

much astonished as "drowsy mortals" at the last trump,

"When, called in haste, _they fumble for their limbs_,"

and propose to take upon himself the whole of a crime shared with another

by asking Heaven _to charge the bill_ on him. And in "King Arthur,"

written ten years after the Preface from which I have quoted his

confession about Dubartas, we have a passage precisely of the kind he

condemned:--

"Ah for the many souls as but this morn

Were clothed with flesh and warmed with vital blood,

But naked now, or _shirted_ but with air."

Dryden too often violated his own admirable rule, that "an author is not

to write all he can, but only all he ought."[26] In his worst images,

however, there is often a vividness that half excuses them. But it is a

grotesque vividness, as from the flare of a bonfire. They do not flash

into sudden lustre, as in the great poets, where the imaginations of poet

and reader leap toward each other and meet half-way.

English prose is indebted to Dryden for having freed it from the cloister

of pedantry. He, more than any other single writer, contributed, as well

by precept as example, to give it suppleness of movement and the easier

air of the modern world. His own style, juicy with proverbial phrases,

has that familiar dignity, so hard to attain, perhaps unattainable except

by one who, like Dryden, feels that his position is assured. Charles

Cotton is as easy, but not so elegant; Walton as familiar, but not so

flowing; Swift as idiomatic, but not so elevated; Burke more splendid,

but not so equally luminous. That his style was no easy acquisition

(though, of course, the aptitude was innate) he himself tells us. In his

dedication of "Troilus and Cressida" (1679), where he seems to hint at

the erection of an Academy, he says that "the perfect knowledge of a

tongue was never attained by any single person. The Court, the College,

and the Town must all be joined in it. And as our English is a

composition of the dead and living tongues, there is required a perfect

knowledge, not only of the Greek and Latin, but of the Old German,

French, and Italian, and to help all these, a conversation with those

authors of our own who have written with the fewest faults in prose and

verse. But how barbarously we yet write and speak your Lordship knows,

and I am sufficiently sensible in my own English.[27] For I am often put

to a stand in considering whether what I write be the idiom of the

tongue, or false grammar and nonsense couched beneath that specious name

of _Anglicism_, and have no other way to clear my doubts but by

translating my English into Latin, and thereby trying what sense the

words will bear in a more stable language." _Tantae molis erat_. Five

years later: "The proprieties and delicacies of the English are known to

few; it is impossible even for a good wit to understand and practise them

without the help of a liberal education, long reading and digesting of

those few good authors we have amongst us, the knowledge of men and

manners, _the freedom of habitudes and conversation with the best company

of both sexes_, and, in short, without wearing off the rust which he

contracted while he was laying in a stock of learning." In the passage I

have italicized, it will be seen that Dryden lays some stress upon the

influence of women in refining language. Swift, also, in his plan for an

Academy, says: "Now, though I would by no means give the ladies the

trouble of advising us in the reformation of our language, yet I cannot

help thinking that, since they have been left out of all meetings except

parties at play, or where worse designs are carried on, our conversation

has very much degenerated."[28] Swift affirms that the language had grown

corrupt since the Restoration, and that "the Court, which used to be the

standard of propriety and correctness of speech, was then, and, I think,

has ever since continued, the worst school in England."[29] He lays the

blame partly on the general licentiousness, partly upon the French

education of many of Charles's courtiers, and partly on the poets. Dryden

undoubtedly formed his diction by the usage of the Court. The age was a

very free-and-easy, not to say a very coarse one. Its coarseness was not

external, like that of Elizabeth's day, but the outward mark of an inward

depravity. What Swift's notion of the refinement of women was may be

judged by his anecdotes of Stella. I will not say that Dryden's prose did

not gain by the conversational elasticity which his frequenting men and

women of the world enabled him to give it. It is the best specimen of

every-day style that we have. But the habitual dwelling of his mind in a

commonplace atmosphere, and among those easy levels of sentiment which

befitted Will's Coffee-house and the Bird-cage Walk, was a damage to his

poetry. Solitude is as needful to the imagination as society is wholesome

for the character. He cannot always distinguish between enthusiasm and

extravagance when he sees them. But apart from these influences which I

have adduced in exculpation, there was certainly a vein of coarseness in

him, a want of that exquisite sensitiveness which is the conscience of

the artist. An old gentleman, writing to the Gentleman's Magazine in

1745, professes to remember "plain John Dryden (before he paid his court

with success to the great) in one uniform clothing of Norwich drugget. I

have eat tarts at the Mulberry Garden with him and Madam Reeve, when our

author advanced to a sword and Chadreux wig."[30] I always fancy Dryden

in the drugget, with wig, lace ruffles, and sword superimposed. It is the

type of this curiously incongruous man.

The first poem by which Dryden won a general acknowledgment of his power

was the "Annus Mirabilis," written in his thirty-seventh year. Pepys,

himself not altogether a bad judge, doubtless expresses the common

opinion when he says: "I am very well pleased this night with reading a

poem I brought home with me last night from Westminster Hall, of

Dryden's, upon the present war; a very good poem."[31] And a very good

poem, in some sort, it continues to be, in spite of its amazing

blemishes. We must always bear in mind that Dryden lived in an age that

supplied him with no ready-made inspiration, and that big phrases and

images are apt to be pressed into the service when great ones do not

volunteer. With this poem begins the long series of Dryden's prefaces, of

which Swift made such excellent, though malicious, fun that I cannot

forbear to quote it. "I do utterly disapprove and declare against that

pernicious custom of making the _preface_ a bill of fare to the book. For

I have always looked upon it as a high point of indiscretion in

monster-mongers and other retailers of strange sights to hang out a fair

picture over the door, drawn after the life, with a most eloquent

description underneath; this has saved me many a threepence.... Such is

exactly the fate at this time of _prefaces_.... This expedient was

admirable at first; our great Dryden has long carried it as far as it

would go, and with incredible success. He has often said to me in

confidence, 'that the world would never have suspected him to be so great

a poet, if he had not assured them so frequently, in his prefaces, that

it was impossible they could either doubt or forget it.' Perhaps it may

be so; however, I much fear his instructions have edified out of their

place, and taught men to grow wiser in certain points where he never

intended they should."[32] The _monster-mongers_ is a terrible thrust,

when we remember some of the comedies and heroic plays which Dryden

ushered in this fashion. In the dedication of the "Annus" to the city of

London is one of those pithy sentences of which Dryden is ever afterwards

so full, and which he lets fall with a carelessness that seems always to

deepen the meaning: "I have heard, indeed, of some virtuous persons who

have ended unfortunately, but never of any virtuous nation; Providence is

engaged too deeply when the cause becomes so general." In his "account"

of the poem in a letter to Sir Robert Howard he says: "I have chosen to

write my poem in quatrains or stanzas of four in alternate rhyme, because

I have ever judged them more noble and of greater dignity, both for the

sound and number, than any other verse in use amongst us.... The learned

languages have certainly a great advantage of us in not being tied to the

slavery of any rhyme.... But in this necessity of our rhymes, I have

always found the couplet verse most easy, though not so proper for this

occasion; for there the work is sooner at an end, every two lines

concluding the labor of the poet." A little further on: "They [the

French] write in alexandrines, or verses of six feet, such as amongst us

is the old translation of Homer by Chapman: all which, by lengthening

their chain,[33] makes the sphere of their activity the greater." I have

quoted these passages because, in a small compass, they include several

things characteristic of Dryden. "I have ever judged," and "I have always

found," are particularly so. If he took up an opinion in the morning, he

would have found so many arguments for it before night that it would seem

already old and familiar. So with his reproach of rhyme; a year or two

before he was eagerly defending it;[34] again a few years, and he will

utterly condemn and drop it in his plays, while retaining it in his

translations; afterwards his study of Milton leads him to think that

blank verse would suit the epic style better, and he proposes to try it

with Homer, but at last translates one book as a specimen, and behold, it

is in rhyme! But the charm of this great advocate is, that, whatever side

he was on, he could always find excellent reasons for it, and state them

with great force, and abundance of happy illustration. He is an exception

to the proverb, and is none the worse pleader than he is always pleading

his own cause. The blunder about Chapman is of a kind into which his

hasty temperament often betrayed him. He remembered that Chapman's

"Iliad" was in a long measure, concluded without looking that it was

alexandrine, and then attributes it generally to his "Homer." Chapman's

"Iliad" is done in fourteen-syllable verse, and his "Odyssee" in the very

metre that Dryden himself used in his own version,[35] I remark also what

he says of the couplet, that it was easy because the second verse

concludes the labor of the poet. And yet it was Dryden who found it hard

for that very reason. His vehement abundance refused those narrow banks,

first running over into a triplet, and, even then uncontainable, rising

to an alexandrine in the concluding verse. And I have little doubt that

it was the roominess, rather than the dignity, of the quatrain which led

him to choose it. As apposite to this, I may quote what he elsewhere says

of octosyllabic verse: "The thought can turn itself with greater ease in

a larger compass. When the rhyme comes too thick upon us, it straightens

the expression: we are thinking of the close, when we should be employed

in adorning the thought. It makes a poet giddy with turning in a space

too narrow for his imagination."[36]

Dryden himself, as was not always the case with him, was well satisfied

with his work. He calls it his best hitherto, and attributes his success

to the excellence of his subject, "incomparably the best he had ever had,

_excepting only the Royal Family_." The first part is devoted to the

Dutch war; the last to the fire of London. The martial half is infinitely

the better of the two. He altogether surpasses his model, Davenant. If

his poem lack the gravity of thought attained by a few stanzas of

"Gondibert," it is vastly superior in life, in picturesqueness, in the

energy of single lines, and, above all, in imagination. Few men have read

"Gondibert," and almost every one speaks of it, as commonly of the dead,

with a certain subdued respect. And it deserves respect as an honest

effort to bring poetry back to its highest office in the ideal treatment

of life. Davenant emulated Spenser, and if his poem had been as good as

his preface, it could still be read in another spirit than that of

investigation. As it is, it always reminds me of Goldsmith's famous

verse. It is remote, unfriendly, solitary, and, above all, slow. Its

shining passages, for there are such, remind one of distress-rockets sent

up at intervals from a ship just about to founder, and sadden rather than

cheer.[37]

The first part of the "Annus Mirabilis" is by no means clear of the false

taste of the time,[38] though it has some of Dryden's manliest verses and

happiest comparisons, always his two distinguishing merits. Here, as

almost everywhere else in Dryden, measuring him merely as poet, we recall

what he, with pathetic pride, says of himself in the prologue to

"Aurengzebe":--

"Let him retire, betwixt two ages cast,

The first of this, the hindmost of the last."

Among My Books. First Series · 第 11 / 28 题