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