Corbyn Morris - An Essay towards Fixing the True Standards of Wit, Humour, Railery, Satire, and Ridicule (1744)
C >>
Corbyn Morris >> An Essay towards Fixing the True Standards of Wit, Humour, Railery, Satire, and Ridicule (1744)
Pages:
1 | 2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6
_Dryden_, in the Preface to his _Opera_, entitled, _The State of
Innocence_, or _Fall of Man_, gives the following _Decree_ upon WIT.
The _Definition of WIT_, (which has been so often attempted, and
ever unsuccessfully by many Poets) is only this: That it is _a
Propriety of Thoughts and Words; or in other Terms, Thoughts and
Words elegantly adapted to the Subject_.
If Mr. _Dryden_ imagined, that he had succeeded _himself_ in this
_Definition_, he was extremely mistaken; for nothing can be more
distant from the Properties of WIT, than those he describes. He
discovers no Idea of the _Surprize_, and _Brilliancy_ of WIT, or of
the sudden _Light_ thrown upon a Subject. Instead of once pointing at
these, he only describes the Properties of clear _Reasoning_, which
are _a Propriety of Thoughts and Words_;--Whereas WIT, in its sudden
_Flashes_, makes no Pretension to _Reasoning_; but is perceived in the
pleasant _Surprize_ which it starts, and in the _Light_ darted upon
a Subject, which instantly vanishes again, without abiding a strict
Examination.
The other Definition he gives, which is, _Thoughts and Words elegantly
adapted to the Subject_, is very different from the former, but
equally unhappy.
For _Propriety_, in _Thoughts_ and _Words_, consists in exhibiting
_clear, pertinent Ideas_, in _precise_ and _perspicuous Words_.
Whereas ELEGANCE consists in the _compt_, _well pruned_ and _succinct
Turn_ of a Subject.
The Object of the _First_, is to be _clear_, and _perspicuous_; whence
it often appears in pursuit of these, not _compt_ or _succinct_:
Whereas the _Essence_ of ELEGANCE is to be _compt_ and _succinct_,
for the Sake of which Ornaments it often neglect _Perspicuity_, and
_Clearness_.--In short, a _Propriety_ of Thoughts and Words, may
subsist without any _Elegance_; as an _Elegance_ of Thoughts and Words
may appear without a perfect _Propriety_.
The last _Definition_, as it is thus very different from the former is
also equally unhappy: For ELEGANCE is no _essential_ Property of WIT.
_Pure_ WIT resulting solely from the _quick Elucidation_ of one
Subject, by the sudden _Arrangement_, and _Comparison_ of it,
with another Subject.--If the two Objects _arranged_ together are
_elegant_, and _polite_, there will then be superadded to the WIT,
an _Elegance_ and _Politeness_ of Sentiment, which will render the
WIT more amiable. But if the Objects are _vulgar_, _obscene_, or
_deformed_, provided the _first_ be _elucidated_, in a lively Manner,
by, the sudden _Arrangement_ of it with the _second_, there will be
equally WIT; though, the Indelicacy of Sentiment attending it, will
render such WIT shocking and abominable.
It is with the highest Respect for the great Mr. _Locke_, that I
deliver his Sentiments upon this Subject.
And hence, perhaps, may be given some Reason of that common
Observation, that Men who have a great deal of _Wit_, and prompt
Memories, have not always the clearest Judgment or deepest
Reason: For _Wit_ lying most in the Assemblage of _Ideas_, and
putting those together with Quickness and Variety, wherein can be
found any Assemblance or Congruity, thereby to make up pleasant
Pictures, and agreeable Visions in the Fancy. _Judgment_, on the
contrary, lies quite on the other side; in separating carefully
one from another, _Ideas_, wherein can be found the least
Difference, thereby to avoid being missed by Similitude, and
by Affinity to take one thing for another. This is a Way of
proceeding quite contrary to Metaphor and Allusion; wherein for
the most Part lies that Entertainment and Pleasantry of _Wit_,
which strikes so lively on the Fancy, and therefore is acceptable
to all People, because its Beauty appears at first Sight, and
there is required no Labour of Thoughts to examine what Truth,
or Reason, there is in it. The Mind, without looking any further,
rests satisfied with the Agreeableness of the Picture, and the
Gaiety of the Fancy. And it is a kind of an Affront to go about
to examine it by the severe Rules of Truth, and good Reason,
whereby it appears, that it conflicts in something that is not
perfectly conformable to them.
It is to be observed that Mr. _Locke_ has here only occasionally,
and passantly, delivered his Sentiments upon this Subject; but yet he
has very happily explained the chief Properties of WIT. It was _his_
Remark _First_, that it lies for the most _Part_ in _assembling_
together with _Quickness_ and _Variety_ Objects, which possess an
_Affinity_, or _Congruity_, with each other; which was the _first_
just Information obtained by the literary World, upon this Subject.
As to what he adds, That the Intention, and Effects, of this
_Assemblage_ of _similar_ Objects, is _to make up pleasant Pictures,
and agreeable Visions in the Fancy_, it is, as I humbly apprehend, not
quite perfect: For the Business of this _Assemblage_ is not merely to
raise pleasant Pictures in the Fancy, but also to _enlighten_
thereby the _original_ Subject.--This is evident; because in such
_Assemblages_, the only Foundation upon which the _new Subject_
is suddenly introduced, is the _Affinity_, and consequently the
_Illustration_, it bears to the _first_ Subject.--The Introduction of
pleasant Pictures and Visions, which present not a new _Illustration_,
and _Light_, to the _original_ Subjects, being rather wild Sallies of
_Vivacity_, than well-aimed, apposite Strokes of WIT.
It is Mr. _Locke_'s Conclusion, at last, That WIT _consists in
something that is not perfectly conformable to Truth, and good
Reason_.--This is a _Problem_ of some Curiosity; and I apprehend
Mr. _Locke_'s Determination upon it to be right:--For the _Direction_
of WIT is absolutely different from the _Direction of_ TRUTH and GOOD
REASON; It being the Aim of WIT to strike the _Imagination_; of TRUTH
and GOOD REASON, to convince the _Judgment_: From thence they can
never be perfectly coincident.
It is however true, that there may be Instances of WIT, wherein the
_Agreement_ between the two Objects shall be absolutely _just_, and
perceived to be such at the first Glance. Such Instances of WIT, will
be then also _Self-evident_ TRUTHS. They will _both_ agree in their
obvious, and quick _Perspicuity_; but will be still different in this,
that the Effort of the _One_ is to strike the _Fancy_, whereas the
_Other_ is wholly exerted in gratifying the _Judgment_.
The Sentiments of Mr. _Addison_ upon WIT, are professedly delivered in
the _Spectator_ No. 62. annexed to the following _Essay_. He has there
justly commended Mr. _Locke_'s Description of WIT; but what he adds,
by Way of Explanation to it, that the _Assemblage_ of Ideas must be
such as shall give _Delight_, and _Surprize_, is not true, in regard
to the Former, _Delight_ being no _essential_ Property of WIT; for
if the _original_ Subject be unpleasant, or deformed, the sudden
unexpected _Arrangement_ of a _similar_ Object with it, may give us
_Surprize_, and be indisputably WIT, and yet be far from creating any
_Delight_.
This Gentleman has also given the following Example, in order to
illustrate the Necessity there is, that _Surprize_ should be always
an Attendant upon WIT.
"When a Poet tells us, the Bosom of his Mistress is as white as
Snow, there is no _Wit_ in the Comparison; but when he adds,
with a Sigh, that it as cold too, it then grows to Wit."
--To compare a Girl's _Bosom_ to _Snow_ for its _Whiteness_ I
apprehend to be WIT, notwithstanding the Authority of so great a
Writer to the contrary. For there is a _Lustre_ resulting from the
_natural_ and _splendid Agreement_ between these Objects, which will
_always_ produce WIT; such, as cannot be destroyed, though it will
quickly be rendered _trite_, by frequent Repetition.
This _Problem_, _How far_ SURPRIZE _is, or is not, necessary to_ WIT,
I humbly apprehend, may be thus solved.--In Subjects which have a
_natural_ and _splendid Agreement_, there will always be WIT upon
their _Arrangement_ together; though when it becomes _trite_, and not
accompanied with _Surprize_, the _Lustre_ will be much faded;--But
where the _Agreement_ is _forced_ and _strained_, _Novelty_ and
_Surprize_ are absolutely necessary to usher it in; An unexpected
_Assemblage_ of this Sort, striking our Fancy, and being gaily
admitted at first to be WIT; which upon frequent Repetition, the
_Judgment_ will have examined, and rise up against it wherever it
appears;--So that in short, in Instances where the _Agreement_ is
_strained_ and _defective_, which indeed are abundantly the most
general, _Surprize_ is a necessary _Passport_ to WIT; but _Surprize_
is not necessary to WIT, where the _Agreement_ between the two
Subjects is _natural_ and _splendid_; though in these Instances
it greatly heightens the _Brillancy_.
The subsequent Remark of Mr. _Addison_, _That the Poet, after saying
his Mistress's Bosom is as white as Snow, should add, with a Sigh,
that it is as cold too, in order that it may grow to_ WIT, is I fear,
very incorrect. For as to the _Sigh_, it avails not a Rush; and this
Addition will be found to be only a _new_ Stroke of WIT, equally
_trite_, and less perfect, and natural, than the former Comparison.
It may also be observed, That Mr. _Addison_ has omitted the
_Elucidation_ of the _original_ Subject, which is the grand Excellence
of WIT. Nor has he prescribed any _Limits_ to the Subjects, which are
to be arranged together; without which the Result will be frequently
the SUBLIME or BURLESQUE; In which, it is true, WIT often appears,
but taking their whole Compositions together, they are different
Substances, and usually ranked in different _Classes_.
All that Mr. _Congreve_ has delivered upon WIT, as far as I know,
appears in his _Essay_ upon HUMOUR, annexed to this Treatise. He
there says,
To define HUMOUR, perhaps, were as difficult, as to define WIT;
for, like that, it is of infinite Variety.
--Again, he afterwards adds,
But though we cannot certainly tell what WIT is, or what HUMOUR
is, yet we may _go near_ to shew something, which is not WIT, or
not HUMOUR, and yet often mistaken for both.
--In this _Essay_, wherein he particularly considers HUMOUR, and
the Difference between _this_, and WIT, he may be expected to have
delivered his best Sentiments upon both: But these Words, which I
have quoted, seem to be as important and precise, as any which he has
offered upon the Subject of WIT. As such, I present them, without any
Remarks, to my Reader, who, if he only _goes near_ to be _edified_ by
them, will discover a great Share of _Sagacity_.
The Sentiments of these eminent Writers upon WIT, having thus been
exhibited, I come next to the Subject of HUMOUR. This has been
_defined_ by some, in the following Manner, with great _Perspicuity._
--HUMOUR is the genuine WIT of _Comedies_,--which has afforded
vast Satisfaction to many _Connoissures_ in the _Belles Lettres_;
especially as WIT has been supposed to be incapable of any
_Definition._
This Subject has also been particularly considered by the
_Spectatator_ No. 35. inserted at the End of the following
_Essay_. Mr. _Addison_ therein _gravely_ remarks, that
It is indeed much easier to describe what is not HUMOUR, than
what it is;
which, I humbly apprehend, is no very _important_ Piece of
Information.--He adds,
And very difficult to define it otherwise, than as _Cowly_ has
done WIT, by Negatives.
This Notion of _defining_ a Subject by _Negatives_, is a favourite
_Crotchet_, and may perhaps be assumed upon other Occasions by future
Writers: I hope therefore I shall be pardoned, if I offer a proper
Explanation of so good a _Conceit_;--To declare then, _That a Subject is
only to be_ DEFINED _by_ NEGATIVES, is to cloath it in a _respectable_
Dress of _Darkness_. And about as much as to say, That it is a _Knight_
of _tenebrose Virtues_; or a _serene Prince_, of the _Blood_ of _Occult
Qualities_.
Mr. _Addison_ proceeds,
Were I to give my own Notions of HUMOUR, I should deliver them
after _Plato's_ Manner, in a Kind of Allegory; and by supposing
HUMOUR to be a Person, deduce to him, all his Qualifications,
according to the following Genealogy: TRUTH was the Founder of
the Family, and the Father of GOOD SENSE; GOOD SENSE was the
Father of WIT, who married a Lady of a collateral Line called
MIRTH, by whom he had Issue HUMOUR.
--It is very unfortunate for this _Allegorical_ Description, that
there is not one Word of it just: For TRUTH, GOOD SENSE, WIT, and
MIRTH, represented to be the immediate _Ancestors_ of HUMOUR; whereas
HUMOUR is derived from the _Foibles_, and whimsical _Oddities_
of _Persons_ in real Life, which flow rather from their
_Inconsistencies_, and _Weakness_, than from TRUTH and GOOD SENSE;
Nor is WIT any _Ancestor_ of HUMOUR, but of a quite different
_Family_; it being notorious that much HUMOUR may be drawn from
the Manners of _Dutchmen_, and of the most formal and dull Persons,
who are yet never guilty of WIT. Again, MIRTH is not so properly
the _Parent_ of HUMOUR, as the _Offspring_.--In short, this whole
_Genealogy_ is a _nubilous_ Piece of Conceit, instead of being any
_Elucidation_ of HUMOUR. It is a formal Method of trifling, introduced
under a deep Ostentation of Learning, which deserves the severest
Rebuke.--But I restrain my Pen, recollecting the _Visions_ of MIRZA,
and heartily profess my high Veneration for their admirable Author.
The _Essay_ upon HUMOUR, at the End of this Treatise, written by
Mr. _Congreve_, is next to be considered. It appears, that at first
he professes his absolute Uncertainty in regard to this Subject; and
says, "_We cannot certainly tell what_ WIT _is, or what_ HUMOUR _is_."
But yet, through his whole Piece, he neglects the Subject of HUMOUR in
general, and only discourses upon the HUMOUR, by which he means barely
the _Disposition_, of Persons: This may particularly appear from the
following Words.
A Man may change his Opinion, but I believe he will find it a
Difficulty to part with his HUMOUR; and there is nothing more
provoking than the being made sensible of that Difficulty.
Sometimes we shall meet with those, who perhaps indifferently
enough, but at the same time impertinently, will ask the
Question, WHY ARE YOU NOT MERRY? WHY ARE YOU NOT GAY, PLEASANT,
AND CHEARFUL? Then instead of answering, could I ask such a
Person, WHY ARE YOU NOT HANDSOME? WHY HAVE YOU NOT BLACK EYES,
AND A BETTER COMPLEXION? Nature abhors to be forced.
The two famous Philosophers of _Ephesus_ and _Abdera_, have their
different Sects at this Day. Some weep, and others laugh at one
and the same Thing.
I don't doubt but you have observed several Men laugh when they
are angry; others, who are silent; some that are loud; yet I
cannot suppose that it is the Passion of ANGER, which is in
itself different, or more or less in one than t'other, but that
it is the HUMOUR of the Man that is predominant, and urges him to
express it in that Manner. Demonstrations of PLEASURE, are as
various: One Man has a HUMOUR of retiring from all Company, when
any thing has happened to please him beyond Expectation; he hugs
himself alone, and thinks it an Addition to the Pleasure to keep
it a Secret, &c.
All which, I apprehend, is no more than saying; That there are different
_Dispositions_ in different _Persons_.
In another Place, he seems to understand by _Humour_, not only the
_Disposition,_ but the _Tone_ of the _Nerves_, of a Person,
thus,
"Suppose MOROSE to be a Man naturally splenetic, and melancholy;
is there any thing more offensive to one of such a DISPOSITION
(where he uses the Word instead of _Humour_) than Noise and
Clamour? Let any Man that has the Spleen (and there are enough in
England) be Judge. We see common Examples of this HUMOUR in
little every Day. 'Tis ten to one, but three Parts in four of the
Company you dine with, are discomposed, and started at the
cutting of a Cork, or scratching of a Plate with a Knife; it is
a Proportion of the same HUMOUR, that makes such, or any other
Noise, offensive to the Person that hears it; for there are
others who will not be disturbed at all by it.
At this Rate every _Weakness_ of _Nerves_, or _Particularity_ of
_Constitution,_ is HUMOUR.
It is true, he justly points out in another Place the different
Sentiments, which ought to be adapted to different _Characters_ in
_Comedy_, according to their different _Dispositions_, or, as he
phrases it, _Humours_: As for Instance, he very rightly observes,
That a Character of a splenetic and peevish HUMOUR, Should have
a satirical WIT. A jolly and sanguine HUMOUR should have a
facetious WIT.
--But still this is no Description of what is well felt, and known, by
the general Name of HUMOUR.
However, as what I have already quoted, may appear to be only his
looser Explanations, it will be necessary to deliver his more closed
and collected Sentiments upon this Subject. These he gives in the
following Words,
I should be unwilling to venture, even in a bare _Description_ of
_Humour_, much more to make a _Definition_ of it; but now my Hand
is in, I will tell you what serves me instead of either. I take
it to be, _A singular and unavoidable Manner of doing or saying
any thing, peculiar and natural to one Man only, by which his
Speech and Actions are distinguished from those of other Men."
--This Description is very little applicable to HUMOUR, but tolerably
well adapted to other Subjects.--Thus, a Person, who is happy in a
particular _Grace_, which accompanies all his Actions, may be said to
possess _a singular and unavoidable Manner of doing or saying any
thing, peculiar and natural to him only, by which his Speech and
Actions are distinguished from those of other Men_. And the same
may be said of a Person of a peculiar _Vivacity_, _Heaviness_,
or _Awkwardness_.--In short, this Description is suited to any
_Particularity_ of a Person in general, instead of being adapted
to the _Foibles_ and _whimsical Oddities_ of Persons, which alone
constitute HUMOUR.
These are the only Pieces upon WIT, and HUMOUR, which have fallen
within my Knowledge; I have here fairly delivered them at length;
and from the Respect which is due to such eminent Writers, have
distinctly and deliberately examined the Merit of each.--As to my
own _Performance_, which is now submitted to the Public, I have to
wish, that it may gain a candid and strict Examination. It has been
my Endeavour to give _Definitions_ of the Subjects, upon which I have
treated; A _Plan_ the most difficult of all others to be executed by
an Author; But such an one, as I apprehend, deserves to be more
generally introduced, and established. If once it was expected by the
Public, that _Authors_ should strictly _define_ their Subjects, it
would instantly checque an Inundation of Scribbling. The _desultory_
Manner of Writing would be absolutely exploded; and _Accuracy_ and
_Precision_ would be necessarily introduced upon every Subject.
This is the _Method_ pursued in Subjects of _Philosophy_; Without
clear and precise _Definitions_ such noble Advances could never have
been made in those Sciences; And it is by the Assistance of _these_
only, that Subjects of _Polite Literature_, can ever be enlightened
and embellished with just Ornaments. If _Definitions_ had been
constantly exacted from Authors there would not have appeared _one
hundreth_ Part of the present Books, and yet every Subject had been
better ascertained.--Nor will this Method, as some may imagine, be
encumbered with Stiffness; On the contrary, in _illustrating_ the
Truth of _Definitions_ there is a full Scope of the utmost Genius,
Imagination, and Spirit of a Writer; and a Work upon this _Plan_ is
adorned with the highest Charms appearing with _Propriety_,
_Clearness_, and _Conviction_, as well as Beauty.
It is true, that the Difficulties, which attend an able Execution
of this _Method_, are not open to a careless Eye; And it is some
Mortification to an _Author_ upon this _Plan_, that his greatest
_Merit_ is likely to lie concealed; A _Definition,_ or _Distinction,_
which after much Attention and Time he has happily delivered with
_Brevity_ and _Clearness_, appearing hereby quite obvious, to others,
and what they cannot imagine could require Pains to discover.
As to the _Examples_, by which I have illustrated the _Definition_ of
_Wit_, they are _common_ and _trite_; but are the best, which I could
find upon deliberate Enquiry. Many Modern instances of _Wit_, which
left very lively Impressions upon me, when I heard them, appearing
upon Re-examination to be quite strained and defective. These, which
I have given, as they are thus _trite_, are not designed in themselves
for any Entertainment to the Reader; but being various, and distant
from each other, they very properly serve to explain the Truth, and
Extent of the _Definition_.
The Character of an HUMOURIST, I expect, will be strange to most of
my Readers; and if no Gentleman is acquainted with a _Person_ of this
_Cast_, it must pass for a _Monster_ of my own Creation;--As to the
Character of Sir _John Falstaff_, it is chiefly extracted from
_Shakespear_, in his 1st Part of King _Henry_ the _IVth_; But so far
as _Sir John_ in _Shakspear's_ Description, sinks into a _Cheat_ or a
_Scoundrel_, upon any Occasion, he is different from that _Falstaff_,
who is designed in the following _Essay_, and is entirely an amiable
Character.
It is obvious, that the Appearance, which _Falstaff_ makes, in the
unfinished Play of _The Merry Wives of Windsor_, is in general greatly
below his true Character. His Imprisonment and Death in the latter
Part of King _Henry_ the _IVth_, seem also to have been written by
_Shakespear_ in Compliance with the _Austerity_ of the Times; and in
order to avoid the Imputation of encouraging _Idleness_ and mirthful
_Riot_ by too amiable and happy an Example.
The Criticism, which I have made, upon _Horace_'s Narrative of his
_Adventure_ with an _Impertinent Fellow_, I offer with Respect; And
beg leave to observe that the chief Part which I object to, is the
_Propriety_ of his introducing himself in so _ridiculous a Plight_;
--Dum sudor ad imos
Manaret Talos;
And
Demitto Auriculas, ut iniquae mentis Acellus
Cum gravius dorso subiit onus.
And other Representations of the same sort, seem to place _Horace_
in a very mean and ludicrous Light; which it is probable he never
apprehended in the full Course of exposing his Companion;--Besides,
the Conduct of his Adversary is in several Places, excessively, and,
as it may be construed, _designedly_, insolent and contemptuous; and
as no Merit or Importance belongs to this Person, there appears no
Reason why _Horace_ should endure such Treatment; or, if the other was
too _powerful_ for him, it is not an _Adventure_ of _Honour_; or what
_Horace_ should chuse to expose to the World in this manner, with all
the Particulars of his own despicable Distress.
However, the _Mirth_ which results from this Narrative, as it
now stands, is perhaps rather the stronger at first, by the full
_Ridicule_ which lies against _Horace_, and his Adversary;--But, upon
Reflection, there arises a Disgust, at the Impropriety of _Horace's_
exposing his own _Meanness_, as well as at the nauseous _Impudence_
of his Companion.
As to _uncommon_ Words, if any such appear in this _Introduction_,
or in the following _Essay_, I hope they want neither _Propriety_,
_Clearness_, nor _Strength_;--And if the _Length_of this Piece to an
_Essay_ so _short_ shall happen at first to _disturb_ any _Critic_,
I beg leave to inform him, that all, which can be fairly collected
from it, is only, that it may have cost _me_ the more Trouble;--But
upon mentioning the _Length_ of this Piece, what behoves me the most,
is, to return my Thanks to two _Gentlemen_, who suffered me to read to
them the whole, as it was gradually written; And by whose _judicious_
and _friendly Instructions_ in the Course of it, my own _Imagination_
was often prevented from running into _Riots_.
However, I am far from imagining, that I have always been reduced
within just Bounds; And now feel a sufficient Share of _Concern_ and
_Anxiety_, for the _Fate_ of this Work;--Yet, I humbly apprehend, that
_this_ must freely be allowed me, that I have not been a _Plagiary_;
But have constantly delivered my own _original_ Sentiments, without
_purloining_ or _disfiguring_ the Thoughts of others; An _Honesty_,
which, I hope, is laudable in an _Author_; And as I have not _stolen_,
neither have I _concealed_, the _Merit_ of other Writers.
It will also be found, as I humbly apprehend, that I have never
_shunned_ the Subject: I mention this particularly, because it is
the Practice of many eminent Writers, after much _curvetting_ and
_prauncing_, suddenly to wheel, and retire, when they are expected
to make their most full Attack.--These Gentlemen, it is true, very
happily avoid _Danger_, and advance and retreat in _excellent Order_:
But, with their Leave, I must observe that they never do any
_Execution_; For Subjects, which have not been surveyed, and laid
open, are like _fortified Places_; and it is the Business of a
_Writer_, as well as of a _Soldier_, to make an Attack;--This has been
the Conduct I have held in the following _Essay_; and however I may
be _shattered_ upon any Occasion, I hope it will appear (if I may be
allowed the Expression) that I have fairly _charged_ the Subjects.
Pages:
1 | 2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6