as it is florid and fuperficial, pleases at firft; but being found incompatible with a just expreffion either of reafon or paffion, foon palls upon the tafte, and is then rejected with difdain, at least rated at a much lower value.

It is impoffible to continue in the practice of contemplating any order of beauty, without being frequently obliged to form comparisons between the feveral fpecies and degrees of excellency, and eftimating their proportion to each other. A man, who has had no opportunity of comparing the different kinds of beauty, is indeed totally unqualified to pronounce an opinion with regard to any object prefented to him. By comparison alone we fix the epithets of praife or blame, and learn how to affign the due degree of each. The coarfeft dawbing of a fign-poft contains a certain luftre of colors and exactness of imitation, which are so far beauties, and would affect the mind of a peasant or Indian with the highest admiration. The moft vulgar ballads are not entirely deftitute of harmony or nature; and none but a person, familiarized to fuperior beauties, would pronounce their numbers harfh, or narration uninterefting. A great inferiority of beauty gives pain to a perfon converfant in the higheft excellency of the kind, and is for that reafon pronounced a deformity: As the most finished object, with which we are acquainted, is naturally fuppofed to have reached the pinnacle of perfection, and to be entitled to the higheft applaufe. A man, who has had opportunities of feeing, and examining and weighing the feveral performances, admired in different ages and nations, can alone rate the merits of a work exhibited to his view, and affign its proper rank among the productions of genius.

BUT to enable him the more fully to execute this undertaking, he must preserve his mind free from all prejudice, and allow nothing to enter into his confideration, but the very object, which is fubmitted to his examination. We may observe, that every work of art, in order to produce its due effect on the mind, must be furveyed in a certain point of view, and cannot be fully relifhed by perfons, whofe fituation, real or imaginary, is not conformable to that required by the performance. An orator addreffes himself to a particular audience, and must have a regard to their particular genius, interefts, opinions, paffions, and prejudices; otherwife he hopes in vain to govern their refolutions, and inflame their affections. Should they even have entertained fome prepoffeffions against him, however unreasonable, he must not overlook this difadvantage; but before he enters upon the fubject, muft endeavor to conciliate their affection, and acquire their good graces. A critic of a different age or nation, who fhould prufe this discourse, must have all thefe circumftances in his eye, and must place himself in the fame fituation as the audience, in order to form a true judgment of the oration. In like manner, when any work is addreffed to the public, tho' I should have a friendship or enmity with the author, I muft depart from this particular fituation; and confidering myself as a man in general, forget, if poffible, my individual being and my peculiar circumftances. A perfon, influenced by prejudice, complies not with this condition; but obftinately maintains his natural pofition, without entering into that required by the performance. If the work be addreffed to perfons of a different age or nation, he makes no allowance for their peculiar views and prejudices; but full of the manners of his own times, rafhly condemns what feemed admirable in the eyes of those for whom alone the discourse was cal culated. If the work be executed for the public, he never fufficiently enlarges his

compre

142

comprehenfion, or forgets his intereft as a friend or enemy, as a rival or commentator. By this means, his fentiments are perverted; nor have the fame beauties and blemishes the fame influence upon him, as if he had impofed a proper violence on his imagination, and had forgot himfelf for a moment. So far his tafte evidently departs from the true standard; and of confequence lofes all credit and authority. IT is well known, that, in all queftions, fubmitted to the understanding, prejudice is most deftructive of found judgment, and perverts all operations of the intellectual faculties: It is no lefs contrary to good tafte; nor has it lefs influence to corrupt our fentiments of beauty. It belongs to good fenfe to check its influence in both cafes; and in this refpect, as well as in many others, reafon, if not an effential part of tafte, is at leaft requifite to the operations of this latter faculty. In all the nobler productions of genius, there is a mutual relation and correfpondence of parts; nor can either the beauties or blemishes be perceived by him, whofe thought is not capacious enough to comprehend all thofe parts, and compare them with each other, in order to perceive the confiftence and uniformity of the whole. Every work of art has alfo a certain end or purpose, for which it is calculated; and is to be deemed more or less perfect, as it is more or lefs fitted to attain this end. The object of eloquence is to perfuade, of history to instruct, of poetry to please by means of the paffions and the imagination. These ends we must carry conftantly in our view, when we perufe any performance; and we must be able to judge how far the means employed are adapted to their respective purposes. Befides, every kind of compofition, even the most poetical, is nothing but a chain of propofitions and reafonings; not always indeed the jufteft and most exact, but still plaufible and fpecious, however disguised by the coloring of the imagination. The perfons, introduced in tragedy and epic poetry, must be represented as reafoning and thinking, and concluding and acting, fuitable to their characters and circumftances; and without judgment, as well as tafte and invention, a poet can never hope to fucceed in fo delicate an undertaking. Not to mention, that the fame excellence of faculties which contributes to the improvement of reason, the fame clearness of conception, the fame exactness of diftinction, the fame vivacity of apprehenfion, are effential to the operations of true tafte, and are its infallible concomitants. It feldom, or never happens, that a man of fenfe, who has experience in any art, cannot judge of its beauty; and it is no less rare to meet with a man, who has a just taste, without a found understanding.

THUS, tho' the principles of tafte be univerfal, and nearly, if not entirely the fame in all men; yet few are qualified to give judgment on any work of art, or establish their own fentiment as the standard of beauty. The organs of internal fenfation are seldom fo perfect as to allow the general principles their full play, and produce a feeling correfpondent to those principles. They either labor under fome defect, or are vitiated by fome diforder; and by that means, excite a fenWhen the critic has no delicacy, timent, which may be pronounced erroneous. he judges without any diftinction, and is only affected by the groffer and more palpable qualities of the object: The finer touches pafs unnoticed and difregarded. Where he is not aided by practice, his verdict is attended with confufion and hesitation. Where no comparison has been employed, the most frivolous beauties, such as rather merit the name of defects, are the objects of his ad

mira

miration. Where he lies under the influence of prejudice, all his natural fentiments are perverted. Where good fenfe is wanting, he is not qualified to difcern the beauties of design and reafoning, which are the highest and most excellent. Under fome or other of thefe imperfections, the generality of men labor; and hence a true judge in the finer arts is obferved, even during the most polished ages, to be fo rare a character: Strong fenfe, united to delicate fentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice, can alone entitle critics to this valuable character; and the joint verdict of fuch, wherever they are to be found, is the true ftandard of tafte and beauty.

BUT where are fuch critics to be found? By what marks are they to be known? How diftinguish them from pretenders? Thefe queftions are embarraffing; and feem to throw us back into the fame uncertainty, from which, during the course of this differtation, we have endeavored to extricate ourselves.

BUT if we confider the matter aright, thefe are questions of fact, not of fentiment. Whether any particular perfon be endowed with good fenfe and a delicate imagination, free from prejudice, may often be the fubject of difpute, and be liable to great difcuffion and enquiry: But that fuch a character is valuable and eftimable will be agreed by all mankind. Where these doubts occur, men can do no more than in other difputable queftions, which are fubmitted to the understanding: They must produce the best arguments, which their invention fuggests to them; they must acknowlege a true and decifive ftandard to exift fomewhere, to wit, real existence and matter of fact; and they must have indulgence to fuch as differ from them in their appeals to this standard. It is fufficient for our prefent purpose, if we have proved, that the taste of all individuals is not upon an equal footing, and that fome men in general, however difficult to be particularly pitched upon, will be acknowleged by univerfal fentiment to have a preference above others.

BUT in reality the difficulty of finding, even in particulars, the standard of tafte, is not so great as it is reprefented. Tho' in fpeculation, we may readily avow a certain criterion in fcience and deny it in fentiment, the matter is found in practice to be much more hard to afcertain in the former cafe than in the latter. Theories of abstract philosophy, fyftems of profound theology have prevailed during one age: In a fucceffive period, these have been univerfally exploded: Their abfurdity has been detected: Other theories and systems have fupplied their place, which again gave way to their fucceffors: And nothing has been experienced more liable to the revolutions of chance and fashion than thefe pretended decifions of science. The cafe is not the fame with the beauties of eloquence and poetry. Juft expreffions of paffion and nature are fure, after a little time, to gain public vogue, which they maintain for ever. ARISTOTLE and PLATO, and EPICURUS and DESCARTES, may fucceffively yield to each other: But TERENCE and VIRGIL maintain an univerfal, undifputed empire over the minds of men. The abftract philofophy of CICERO has loft its credit: The vehemence of his oratory is ftill the object of our admiration.

THO' men of delicate tafte are rare, they are easily to be diftinguished in fociety by the foundness of their understanding and the fuperiority of their faculties above the rest of mankind. The afcendant, which they acquire, gives a prevaJence to that lively approbation, with which they receive any productions of genius, and renders it generally predominant. Many men, when left to themselves,

have but a faint and dubious perception of beauty, who yet are capable of relishing any fine ftroke, which is pointed out to them. Every convert to the admiration of the real poet or orator is the cause of fome new converfion. And tho' prejudices may prevail for a time, they never unite in celebrating any rival to the true genius, but yield at last to the force of nature and just fentiment. And thus tho' a civilized nation may eafily be mistaken in the choice of their admired philofopher, they never have been found long to err, in their affection for a favorite epic or tragic author.

BUT notwithstanding all our endeavors to fix a ftandard of taste, and reconcile the various apprehenfions of men, there ftill remain two fources of variation, which are not fufficient indeed to confound all the boundaries of beauty and deformity, but will often ferve to vary the degrees of our approbation or blame. The one is the different humors of particular men; the other, the particular manners and opinions of our age and country. . The general principles of taste are uniform in human nature: Where men vary in their judgments, fome defect or perversion in the faculties may commonly be remarked; proceeding either from prejudice, from want of practice, or want of delicacy; and there is juft reason for approving one tafte, and condemning another. But where there is fuch a diverfity in the internal frame or external fituation as is entirely blameless on both fides, and leaves no room to give one the preference above the other; in that cafe a certain diversity of judgment is unavoidable, and we feek in vain for a standard, by which we can reconcile the contrary fentiments.

A YOUNG man, whofe paffions are warm, will be more fenfibly touched with amorous and tender images, than a man more advanced in years, who takes pleafure in wife and philofophical reflections concerning the conduct of life and moderation of the paffions. At twenty, OVID may be the favorite author ; HORACE at forty; and perhaps TACITUs at fifty. Vainly would we, in such cases, endeavor to enter into the fentiments of others, and diveft ourselves of those propenfities, which are natural to us. We chufe our favorite author as we do our friend, from a conformity of humors and difpofitions. Mirth or paffion, fentiment or reflection; which ever of these moft predominates in our temper, it gives us a peculiar fympathy with the writer, who refembles us.

ONE perfon is more pleased with the fublime; another with the tender; a third with raillery. One has a strong fenfibility to blemishes, and is extremely studious of correctnefs: Another has a more lively feeling of beauties, and pardons twenty abfurdities and defects for one elevated or pathetic ftroke. The ear of this man is entirely turned towards concifenefs and energy; that man is delighted with a copious, rich, and harmonious expreffion. Simplicity is affected by one; ornament by another. Comedy, tragedy, fatire, odes have each their partizans, who prefer that particular fpecies of writing to all others. It is plainly an error in a critic, to confine his approbation to one fpecies or style of writing, and condemn all the reft. But it is almoft impoffible not to feel a predilection for that which fuits our particular turn and difpofition. Such preferences are innocent and unavoidable, and can never reasonably be the object of difpute, because there is no ftandard, by which they can be decided.

FOR a like reafon, we are more pleased with pictures of characters, which refemble fuch as are found in our own age or country, than with thofe which describe a different fet of customs. 'Tis not without fome effort, that we reconcile

our

ourselves to the fimplicity of antient manners, and behold princeffes drawing water from a fpring, and kings and heroes dreffing their own victuals. We may allow in general, that the reprefentation of fuch manners is no fault in the author, nor deformity in the piece; but we are not fo fenfibly touched with them. For this reafon, comedy is not transferred easily from one age or nation to another. A FRENCHMAN or ENGLISHMAN is not pleafed with the ANDRIA of TERENCE, or CLITIA of MACHIAVEL, where the fine lady, upon whom all the play turns, never once appears to the fpectators, but is always kept behind the fcenes, fuitable to the referved humor of the antient GREEKS and modern ITALIANS.

learning and reflection can make allowance for thefe peculiarities of manners; but a common audience can never diveft themselves fo far of their ufual ideas and fentiments as to relish pictures which no way refemble them.

AND here there occurs a reflection, which may, perhaps, be useful in examining the celebrated controverfy concerning antient and modern learning; where we often find the one fide excufing any feeming abfurdity in the antients from the manners of the age, and the others refufing to admit this excufe, or at leaft, admitting it only as an apology for the author, not for the performance. In my opinion, the proper bounds in this fubject have feldom been fixed between the contending parties. Where any innocent peculiarities of manners are represented, fuch as thofe abovementioned, they ought certainly to be admitted; and a man who is fhocked with them, gives an evident proof of falfe delicacy and refinement. The poets monument more durable than brafs, muft fall to the ground like common brick or clay, were men to make no allowance for the continual revolutions of manners and cuftoms, and would admit nothing but what was fuitable to the prevailing fashion. Muft we throw afide the pictures of our ancestors, because of their ruffs and fardingales? But where the ideas of morality and decency alter from one age to another, and where vicious manners are defcribed, without being marked with the proper characters of blame and difapprobation; this must be allowed to disfigure the poem, and to be a real deformity. I cannot, nor is it proper I fhould, enter into fuch fentiments; and however I may excufe the poet, on account of the manners of his age, I never can relish the compofition. The want of humanity and of decency, fo confpicuous in the characters drawn by fes veral of the antient poets, even fometimes by HOMER and the GREEK tragedians, diminishes confiderably the merit of their noble performances, and gives modern authors a great advantage over them. We are not interested in the fortunes and fentiments of fuch rough heroes: We are difpleafed to find the limits of vice and virtue fo confounded: And whatever indulgence we may give the writer on account of his prejudices, we cannot prevail on ourfelves to enter into his fentiments, or bear an affection to characters, which we plainly difcover to be blameable.

THE cafe is not the fame with moral principles as with fpeculative opinions of any kind. These are in continual flux and revolution. The fon embraces a different fyftem from the father. Nay, there fcarce is any man, who can boast of great conftancy and uniformity in this particular. Whatever fpeculative errors may be found in the polite writings of any age or country, they detract but little from the value of thofe compofitions. There needs but a certain turn of thought or imagination to make us enter into all the opinions, which then prevailed, and relifh the fentiments or conclufions derived from them. But a very violent effort is requifite to change our judgment of manners, and excite fentiments of approba

U