er divert by
his humour, entertain by his wit, or torture by his severity. Each mode
{106}has its advocates. But we think that the mode should be adapted to
the nature of the vice or folly which demands correction. If the vice be
of an atrocious nature, it certainly requires that the satire be severe.
If it be of a nature that arises more from a weakness of mind than
depravity of feeling, we think it should be chastised by the lively
and pointed sarcasms of wit; and, if the failing be merely a folly,
it should only be the subject of humorous ridicule. With respect
to determining which species of satire is the most preferable, the
narrative of Horace and Juvenal, the dramatic of Aristophanes and Foote,
or the picturesque of Hogarth and Stevens; we can best form our
opinion from comparing their different defects and excellencies. As
the narrative is merely a description of manners, it is devoid of that
imitation of passion and character which gives effect to the dramatic.
But, as the language is more pointed, more energetic, and more elegant,
it certainly must impress the reader more deeply. The dramatic,
therefore, while it is calculated to affect more the spectator, is
inferior to the narrative in the closet. The picturesque is more
defective than either of the two former. It has only power to describe
the action of an instant, and {107}this without the assistance of
reflection, observation, and sentiment, which they derive from their
verbal expression.

We may, consequently, perceive that each species has defects to which
others are not liable, and excellencies which the others do not possess.

Thus it is evident that a species of satire, which could blend all the
advantages of all the three, can only be that which is adequate to the
idea of perfect satire. This kind of satire is the Lecture on Heads.
We cannot, therefore, be surprised that it should have been the most
popular exhibition of the age. The heads and their dresses composed the
picturesque: the assumption of character and dialogue by the lecturer,
composed the dramatic; and the lively description of manners, the
judicious propriety and pertinence of observation, composed the
narrative. Thus did the genius of its author invent a species of
entertainment which possessed excellencies that counterbalanced the
defects of all other satirists, produced from the age of Aristophanes,
who flourished four hundred and seven years before the Christian era,
until his o