Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Confervez, ô mon Dieu! l'aimable Frederic,
Pour fon bonheur, pour moi, pour le bien du public.
Vivez, Prince, et passez dans la paix, dans la guerre,
Sur-tout dans les plaifirs tous les Ics de la terre,
Theodoric, Ulric, Genféric, Alaric,

Dont aucun ne vous vaut felon mon prenostic.
Mais lorsque vous aurez, de victoire en victoire,
Arrondi vos Etats, ainfi que votre gloire, &c.

In another epiftle to the king of Pruffia, we have the following lines:

En Hibou, fort fauvent renfermé tout le jour,

Vous percez d'un œil d'Aigle, &c.

En hibou percer d'un œil d'Aigle, what will you call that, fays our Author? I leave you to your own reflections upon it.

In regard to Boileau, there is none of the French poets, who did honour to the age of Lewis XIV. of whom Voltaire speaks fo differently in the different parts of his writings. Sometimes he commends him highly, but much more frequently cenfures and criticizes bim; in confequence of which, it is a common practice among Voltaire's difciples to infult the memory of Boileau.

Our Author does not collect the feveral paffages in Voltaire's writings, wherein he attacks the reputation of Boileau, but confines himself to his epiftle to that great poet. It begins in the following manner :

BOILEAU, correct Auteur de quelques bons écrits,
Zoite de Quinaut, et flatteur de Louis;
Mais oracle du goût, dans cet art difficile,
Où s'egayoit Horace, au travailloit Virgile.
Dans la cour du Palais, je naquis ton voifin;
De ton Siecle brillant mes yeux virent la fin,
Siecle de grands talens bien plus que de lumiére,

Dont Corneille, en bronchant, fut ouvrir la carriere.

M: Clement places the whole of this epiftle before his readers, and then enters into a full and distinct examination of it. Hear part of what he says:

BOILEAU, correct Auteur de quelques bons écrits. Could let's have been faid of a grammarian, who had been the Author of fome good work, correctly written? Is correctnefs then Boileau's principal merit? Is not Boileau one of our greatest poets, for the beauty and truth of imagery, the energy and elegance of expreffion, the choice of epithets, the variety of style, and the harmony of numbers? Is not be the greatest mafter in that very difficult art of beftowing the graces of poetry upon little things? The Author of the Lutrin, and the Art of Poetry is a correct Author of fome good writings! Your

defign,

design, then, Sir, in this epiftle, was to infult Boileau's memory. And what was your motive? The fame which made you detract from the praises of Corneille, and fometimes from those of Racine, viz. because you yourself had written tragedies: the fame which made you difparage Malherbe and Rouffeau, because you never wrote a fingle ode that deferved to be called a good one: the fame which made you criticize Fontaine, because you have not a grain of naïveté in your genius or your style. It is impoffible for you to be ignorant that, as long as Boileau's fatires are remembered, and they will be long remembered, yours will be condemned; and that the Lutrin, the only epic poem in our language, though the subject be a trifling one, will bear teftimony against the Henriade, which has fo little of the epic in it, though the fubject be a noble one. In your Effay on Epic Poetry, you had a fair opportu nity of faying fomething concerning the Lutrin, but not a fyllable: on the contrary, you tell us, that Boileau meddled only with didactic fubje&is, which require nothing but fimplicity. I shall make amends for this omiffion in my letter upon the Henriade, where I hope to be able to prove to you, that this celebrated Henriade is only an historical poem like the Pharfalia, and that the Lutrin is the only poem in our language that can give us an idea of the true epic.

Zoile de Quinaut, et flatteur de Louis.

You had rather not write at all, than not begin a work of what kind foever, by an antithefis, your favourite figure. And what an antithefis is this! the most injurious and the most abfurd that can be imagined. Boileau, Zoile de Quinaut. Quinault then is transformed into a Homer, for having written fome pretty verses, in the worst fpecies of compofition, if, after all, the opera may be deemed a fpecies: and Boileau, for having justly cenfured the morality and the infipidity of such rhapfodies, is confidered as the Zoilus of this Homer of the opera. You will never be reproached, Sir, with being the Zoilus of any middling writer, but with being the Zoilus of Corneille, of Boileau, of Fontaine, of both the Rouffeaus, of Crebillon, of Montefquieu, of Buffon, &c. in a word, of all those who are the objects of your jealoufy.

As to-flatteur de Louis, this is equally abfurd. In the first place, what a ftrange contraft! Lewis XIV. oppofed to Quinault! As if Boileau ought not to have praised Louis le grand, because he had cenfured Quinault! If this famous writer had commended any wretched Author, which he never did, then he might, with juftice, have been reproached with partiality and want of judgment, as there is just reafon for reproaching you, Sir, for having difparaged and infulted much greater men than Quinault, and for having, at the fame time, praised, flattered, and offered up incenfe to fuch men as La Motte, Perrault, &c.

If Boileau has beflowed great praife upon Lewis XIV. wherein is he to blame? Where is the flattery? Had not this king fome very commendable qualities? He had his infirmities and frailties, undoubtedly; and what king, what man is without them? Could he be reproached with profcriptions like Auguftus? And yet that emperor was commended by Horace and by. Virgil. Could Boileau fee the love of his prince for what was great, for the liberal arts, &c. the favourable reception which diftinguished abilities never failed to meet with, and the rewards that were liberally beftowed upon merit; could he fee this, I say, without enthusiasm? Was it possible for him not to be warmed with gratitude, when his prince, spoke to him in fuch engaging and fuch flattering terms? But who ever praised with more delicacy of dignity than Boileau? On what occafion are his praises mean or infipid? In this respect he is fuperior to every poet. In order to be convinced of this let me beg of you, Sir, to read once more thofe parts of his works, wherein he fpeaks of Louis-le-grand, his eighth epistle, the conclufion of his Art of Poetry, &c. What ingenious, what noble, what natural turns of expreffion! Befides, has Boileau praifed none but his prince? All the great men of the age he lived in, in every different walk of life, were praised by him, and he never retracted his praifes. The great Conde, Turenne, Vivenne, Nantouillet, Rochefoucault, Colbert, &c. all received their juft portion of praife. You yourself, Sir, have beftowed as many pompous praifes, at leaft, upon Lewis XIV. as Boileau did. But what do I fay? Boileau had the noble courage to speak the language of truth to his prince. Read his firft epiftle, wherein he expreffes himself with fo much force and fpirit against conquerors, and relates the converfation of Pyrrhus and Cineas, which is a very adroit cenfure of the vaft enterprizes of Lewis.

On peut être héros fans ravager la terre.

Il eft plus d'une gloire. En vain aux conquerans
L'erreur, parmi les rois, donne les premiers rangs.
Entre les grands héros ce font les plus vulgaires,
Chaque fiecle eft fécond en heureux téméraires.

Is this the language of flattery, Sir? Is it poffible to speak truth to a king in bolder terms, than to place him in the number of the heureux téméraires? And what renders the character of Boi leau yet more refpectable, he ftill continued attached to thofe whom he loved, even when they had incurred the king's dif pleasure. When Janfenifm was a crime at court, he was the Erft to turn into ridicule the fashionable madness of calling the Janfenifts men of great merit and virtue, with a view to blacken their characters. He did juftice, in the most public and open manner, to the virtues and abilities of the famous Arnaud, though in disgrace; and confecrated his veneration and ten

derness

dernefs for him, by that beautiful epitaph wherewith he honoured his tomb.

But have not you, Sir, who accufe Boileau of having flattered Lewis XIV. carried your incense from court to court? Have not you offered it up, with a very liberal hand, not only to fovereigns inferior in every refpect to Louis-le-grand, but to a thousand other perfons very little esteemed by the Public?

This is a fpecimen of our Author's obfervations upon Voltaire's epistle to Boileau; we recommend the whole to the attentive and impartial perufal of Voltaire's numerous admirers; although it fhould tend, in fome degree, to leffen that veneration in which his character as a writer has long been held. R.

ART. XIII.

Les Trois Siecles de notre Litterature, ou Tableau de L'Esprit de nos Ecrivains, depuis François I. jufqu'en 1772: par ordre alphabétique. The three Ages of trench Literature, &c. 8vo. 3 Vols. Paris, 17721

[ocr errors]

IN

N the preface to this ingenious and entertaining work, the Author draws a very melancholy, though we are afraid, too just a picture of the prefent ftate of Literature and Morals in France.

An age of genius, of reason, of greatnefs, and of glory, fays he, is fucceeded by a frivolous, weak, giddy, and abfurd age. The theatre of Literature is invaded by three forts of enemies, who degrade it; a tyrannical and contradictory philofophy choaks the very feeds of genius; a false tafte deftroys true and folid principles; and a blind facility of admiring every thing banishes emulation and difcourages merit. Rules are defpifed, ranks confounded, and great masters infulted; knowledgets little honoured, mediocrity favourably received, nay even celebrated, and a bold and daring spirit fupplies the place of genius. We fee almost every moment the moft whimfical publications, aftonishing fuccefs, ufurped reputations, and were it not for fome Writers who are incapable of yielding to the torrent, good tafte and reafon would have neither difciples nor fupport.

In fuch a state of things, it is impoffible for zeal not to raise its voice. Whilft prejudice, or the fpirit of party, continue to difpenfe praise or cenfure, the progrefs of degeneracy will infallibly become more rapid. It is the duty, therefore, of the impartial scholar, the friend of truth and juftice, to combat fuch ufurpations, to open the eyes of the multitude, to pronounce, according to invariable rules, upon the merit or demerit of fo many Authors, forgotten through injustice, or applauded through feduction. And why should we be afraid of taking this office upon us?

The

...The Republic of Letters is a state perfectly free, in which every citizen enjoys the fame privileges, though he does not enjoy the fame honours; the most illuftrious has no rights but what are supported by merit and talents, and the most obfcure does not exceed the limits of his power, when he paffes fentence upon them; the only thing neceffary is to found his determinations upon justice and solid principles.

. It would be ridiculous, after this, to afk us, what are the mafter-pieces which you have produced? If the Writers whom we cenfure were to put this queftion to us, we might answer; the fear of doing no better than you, has kept us from giving our works to the Public, and the knowledge we have of what 'is indifpenfably neceflary in a good work has determined us to cenfure yours. If it were neceffary to add other reasons, we might fay, Muft one be an excellent Painter before he can have a right to judge of the faults or beauties of the Painter who exposes his pictures to the critical eye of the Public? It is fufficient to be a Spectator. It has been faid a thousand times, that the man who publishes his works acknowledges every indi vidual for his judge.

Des que l'impreffion fait éclore un Poëte,

Il eft efclave nè de quiconque l'achete.

Boileau was in the right, and we fubmit to his authority. Let us not be reproached with affuming a decifive tone in the greatest part of our articles. We declare before-hand that our intention is to deliver our own sentiments, and that, by omitting the following modes of expreffion,-it feems to us, it appears to us, in our opinion, &c. we mean only to avoid repetitions. The falfe modefty of fuch language is incapable of producing any other effect but that of weakening the truth, and fatiguing the Reader by a tirefome and difgufting monotony.

It would be equally unjuft to find fault with certain ftrokes of criticism, wherein pleafantry drops from us, as it were, of its own accord, at the fight of ridicule; if we had known any other method better adapted to mark and expofe it, we should certainly have employed it. The fame may be faid in regard to certain emotions of zeal which particular circumstances have excited in us; the greatness of the provocation, and the prospec of impunity have always made the fame impreffions upon every mind that has any fenfibility or regard to juftice; and the judicious part of our Readers will pardon us the more readily, as they will be fenfible by what they feel in themselves, that when the caufe of religion, morals, and tafte, is to be vindicated against the errors of feveral popular Writers, one cannot exprefs himself too flrongly. Writers who attack fociety have no right to demand respect, fince they themfelves are wanting in that respect which every good citizen thinks indifpenfably neceffary.

Among

« ПретходнаНастави »