FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   >>  
sts who do not discriminate as to the eggs or the butter they eat, it does not follow that a normal taste should not know the difference. Because there is a highly artistic nation that welcomes the flavor of garlic in everything, and another which claims to be the most civilized in the world that cannot tell coffee from chicory, or because the ancient Chinese love rancid sesame oil, or the Esquimaux like spoiled blubber and tainted fish, it does not follow that there is not in the world a wholesome taste for things natural and pure. It is clear that the critic of contemporary literature is quite as likely to be wrong as right. He is, for one thing, inevitably affected by the prevailing fashion of his little day. And, worse still, he is apt to make his own tastes and prejudices the standard of his judgment. His view is commonly provincial instead of cosmopolitan. In the English period just referred to it is easy to see that most of the critical opinion was determined by political or theological animosity and prejudice. The rule was for a Tory to hit a Whig or a Whig to hit a Tory, under whatever literary guise he appeared. If the new writer was not orthodox in the view of his political or theological critic, he was not to be tolerated as poet or historian, Dr. Johnson had said everything he could say against an author when he declared that he was a vile Whig. Macaulay, a Whig, always consulted his prejudices for his judgment, equally when he was reviewing Croker's Boswell or the impeachment of Warren Hastings. He hated Croker,--a hateful man, to be sure,--and when the latter published his edition of Boswell, Macaulay saw his opportunity, and exclaimed before he had looked at the book, as you will remember, "Now I will dust his jacket." The standard of criticism does not lie with the individual in literature any more than it does in different periods as to fashions and manners. The world is pretty well agreed, and always has been, as to the qualities that make a gentleman. And yet there was a time when the vilest and perhaps the most contemptible man who ever occupied the English throne,--and that is saying a great deal,--George IV, was universally called the "First Gentleman of Europe." The reproach might be somewhat lightened by the fact that George was a foreigner, but for the wider fact that no person of English stock has been on the throne since Saxon Harold, the chosen and imposed rulers of England having been Fr
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   >>  



Top keywords:
English
 
throne
 
literature
 
Boswell
 

Croker

 

Macaulay

 

theological

 

standard

 

prejudices

 

judgment


political

 

George

 

critic

 

follow

 

published

 

hateful

 

edition

 
opportunity
 
looked
 

person


exclaimed

 

Warren

 
declared
 

England

 

author

 

consulted

 
equally
 

Harold

 

impeachment

 
chosen

imposed

 
reviewing
 

rulers

 

Hastings

 
called
 

universally

 

qualities

 

agreed

 

manners

 

pretty


gentleman

 
occupied
 
contemptible
 

vilest

 

Gentleman

 

fashions

 

jacket

 

lightened

 

remember

 
criticism