when a fubject fills the mind, it leaves no room for any separate concern *. Variety is more tolerable in comedy, which pretends only to amufe, without totally occupying *Racine, in his preface to the tragedy of Berenice, is fenfible, that fimplicity is a great beauty in tragedy, but miftakes the caufe. "Nothing (fays he) but verifimilitude plea : true, fes in tragedy: but where is the verifimilitude, that within "the compafs of a day, events fhould be crowded which "commonly are extended through months?" This is miftaking the accuracy of imitation for the probability or improbability of future events. I explain myself. The verifimilitude required in tragedy, is that the actions correfpond to the manners, and the manners to nature. When this resemblance is preferved, the imitation is juft, because it is a true copy of nature. But I deny that the verifimilitude of future events, meaning the probability of future events, is any rule intragedy. A number of extraordinary events, are, it is feldom crowded within the compafs of a day but what feldom happens' may happen; and when fuch events fall out, they appear not lefs natural than the most ordinary accidents. To make verifimilitude in the fenfe of probability a governing rule in tragedy, would annihilate this fort of writing altogether; for it would exclude all extraordinary events, in which the life of tragedy confifts. It is very improbable or unlikely, pitching upon any man at random, that he will facrifice his life and fortune for his mistress or for his country: yet when this event happens, fuppofing it agreeable to the character, we recognize the verifimilitude as to nature, whatever want of verifimilitude or of probability there was a priori that fuck would be the event. } the the mind. But even here, to make a double plot agreeable, a good deal of art is requifite. The under-plot ought not to vary greatly in its tone from that which is principal: paffions may be varied, but difcordant paffions are unpleasant when jumbled together. This is a folid objection to tragicomedy. For this reafon, I blame the Provok'd Hufband: all the fcenes that bring the family of the Wrongheads into action, being ludicrous and farcical, agree very ill with the fharpness and severity of the principal subject, exhibiting the difcord betwixt Lord Townly and his lady. The fame objection touches not the double plot of the Careless Husband: the different fubjects are sweetly connected; and have only fo much variety as to refemble shades of colours harmonioufly mixed. But this is not all. The under plot ought to be connected with the principal action, fo as to employ the fame perfons: the intervals or paufes of the principal action ought to be filled with the under-plot; and both ought to be concluded together. This is the cafe of the Merry Wives of Windfor. . Violent སྙ Violent action ought to be excluded from the stage. While the dialogue runs on, a thousand particulars concur to delude us into an impreffion of reality; genuine fentiments, paffionate language, and perfuafive gefture. The fpectator once engaged, is willing to be deceived, lofes fight of himself, and without fcruple enjoys the fpectacle as a reality. From this abfent ftate, he is roused by violent action : he wakes as from a pleafing dream, and ga thering his fenfes about him, finds all to be a fiction. Horace delivers the fame rule; and founds it upon the reafon given Ne pueros coram populo Medea trucidet; tit The French critics, as it appears to me, misapprehend the reafon of this rule. Shedding blood upon the ftage, fay they, is barbarous and fhocking to a polite audience. This no doubt is an additional reason for excluding bloodshed from the French French ftage, fuppofing the French to be in reality fo delicate. But this evidently is not the reason that weighed with the Greeks: that polite people had no notion of fuch delicacy; witness the murder of Clytemneftra by her fon Oreftes, paffing behind the scene, as reprefented by Sophocles. Her voice is heard calling out for mercy, bitter expoftulations on his part, loud fhrieks upon her being stabb'd, and then a deep filence. I appeal to every perfon of feeling, whether this fcene be not more horrible, than if the deed had been committed in fight of the fpectators upon a fudden guft of paffion. According to the foregoing reafoning of the French critics, there is nothing to exclude from the ftage a duel occafioned by an affair of honour, because in it there is nothing barbarous or fhocking to a polite audience: yet a scene of this nature is excluded from the French stage; which shows, without more argument, that these critics have misapprehended the rule laid down by Horace. If Corneille, in representing the affair betwixt Horatius and his fifter, upon which murder enfues enfues behind the scene, had no other view. than to remove from the spectators a scene of horror, he certainly was in a capital mistake: for murder in cold blood, which in some measure was the cafe as represented, is more horrible even where the conclufive ftab is not feen, than the fame act perform→ ed on the stage by violent and unpremeditated paffion, as fuddenly repented of as committed. I heartily agree with Addison *; that no part of this incident ought to have been reprefented, but referved for a narrative, with all the alleviating circumstances poffible in favour of the hero. This is the only method to avoid the difficulties that unqualify this incident for representation, a deliberate murder on the one hand, and on the other a violent action performed on the ftage, which muft rouse the spectator from his dream of reality. I fhall finish with a few words upon the dialogue; which ought to be fo conducted as to be a true representation of nature. I * Spectator, No. 44. talk |