1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

download 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

of 71

Transcript of 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    1/71

    UNIVERSITY of DETROITEXCERPT fro m the GRADUATE BULLETIN, 1935 1937

    Page Nine

    \.

    Use of Theses and Th esis M aterials. The University of Detroita lways encourages, and even urges, th e use of theses, thesis materials, andterm papers submitted to instr uctors or de partments o f th e University inin partia l fu lfillment of the requirement s for credit o r degrees. Such us ema y be oral (be fore meetings or conven tions) or through publication (period-ica ls, monographs , or books.) Howev er , as such theses, thesis materials,and term papers become th e pr o perty o f the University once they are sub-mitted , it is expected that th e permission o f the University be s ecured forsuch oral or printed use , and a suitable credit line arranged. T his permis-sion, and a rrangernent of credit line , should also be observed in th e case oft he p u bl ic at i on o f materials wh ich th e st udent intends to use later in partialfullfillment o f the req uire ments for credit or degrees, Fa i lure to observesuch courtesy may be followed by th e withdrawal of the credit or degree,

    Applicat ion for the use o f materials a n d a rr an g em en ts mentionedmust be mad e with the Graduat e Office of th e Uni versity of Detroit.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    2/71

    ' l ID; NIVERSITY or' DE HO 'I'

    BLAIll t S RHE 'roRIL: HI ltii.:LATION '1'0EIGH'mEN'lR CENWRY AES'IHETICS

    A 'IHESISSUBMITTED TO 'lliE GRADUATE FACULTY

    IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF 'lliEREQ.UIREMEN'IB FOR 'IRE DEGREE OF

    MASTER OF ARTS

    DEPAR'IMENT OF ENGLISH

    BY-

    2SThl0N EDWARD BABEL

    DETRO I 'll, ' I CHI GANMarch, 1943

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    3/71

    TABLE 0] ' CONTENTS

    PageUhapt er

    HISTORIUAL A K R ~ O BLAIR 'S RHE1URIUI .

    I I .IN 'rRODUC TION . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 14. . . . . . . . . .I I . BLAIR I S .UONUEPT Uj!' rlEAU1T{

    . . . . .. . . . . . .19283541. . .

    . . .. .BLAI R ' S CONCEPT OF IMITATION BLAIR' S UONCEPT 0 ] ' ':i.llli SUBLIME

    BLAIR 'S CONCEPT OF '.cASTE v.

    V I.

    TV.

    VI I . APPLl uATI ONS OF BLAIR ' S O N E P ~ ~ AliD PARTIUULARLITERARY U R b ~ 51. . . . .. . .I I I . l.iONl.iLUSION tlIi3LIOGRAPl:fY . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 6267

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    4/71

    GRAFTER IINTRODUCTION

    Hugh Blair ' s Lectures g Rhetoric and Belles Lettres l i sa celebrated work which belongs to the reaLm of rhetoric . I twas used widely as a guide and text in rhetorical study andintel lectual discipl ine during th e n ineteen th and early twentieth centuries. Bla i r ' s Rhetoric is a corpus of principles andopinions about l i te ra ture which forma a suitable and desirablesUbject for rhetorical study. However, i t s point of view isone frequently assumed in l i terary c r i t i c ~ s m , namely, the rhe-tor ica l point of view, and i t s importance as a document inthe history of . eighteenth century l i terary cri t icism vms undoubtedly great.

    I t is my purpose to view Blai r ' s Rhetoric as a documentin the history of l i terary cri t icism and as a representativeeighteenth century t reatment of l i t e rary problems. Most ofthe l i terary cri t icism of the eighteenth century revolvesaround the age's concept of Beauty, Sublimity, Imi ta t ion andTaste. I f one can come to a knowledge of what th e e ighteen thcentury meant by these terms, understanding of the i r posit ionin regard to l i terary crit icism wil l follow.

    1. Hugh Blair , Lectures on Rhetoric and bel les Let t res.In succeeding references to bla i r ' s work throughout th is s t u d ~i t wil l be referred to simply as Rhetoric. I t wil l be understood that such references wil l be to bla i r ' s Rhetoric in theedit ion noted in the b ib liography.1

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    5/71

    2

    Hence the specific purpose of this paper \ill be to consider Blair ' s Rhetoric as a representative treatment of l i t e r -a ry matte rs against the background of eighteenth centurythought and l i terary theory, to examine Hlair ' s understandingand treatment of Heauty, Sublimity, Imitation and Taste, andto distinguish Hla i r ' s treatment of' these terms and conceptsfor the purpose of discovering eighteenth century notions.

    In order to accomplish these purposes effect ively, i twil l be necessary to give the background of the term rhetoricand to show i t s relat ion to cri t ic ism and other matters in volved in the eighteenth century discussions of' l i teraryproblems. I t will be necessary to examine the meaning of theterm rhetoric and the problems involved in l i terary cri t icism.Blair ' s ideas will be examined in order to make understand-able what the eighteenth century was doing with the rhetor i -cal t radi t ion of the ancients, and to f ind the influencesshaping eighteenth century l i terary notions in order to findthe problems regarded as chiefly important a t t his time.

    I t will be necessary to deal wi t h t l lair ts notion andconcept of' tleauty. His treatment of the te rm in re l at i on toeighteenth cen tury not ions will be considered. 'he r e willbe an attempt to find what he meant by this term in order toget nearer to the solution of the cr i t ica l problems of' thetime. Likewise, SUblimity, Imitation and Taste respectivelywill be t reated in the same manner as Beauty.

    In conclusion, on the basis of th e matters considered,we should be able to came to some evaluation of the worth of

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    6/71

    3t h i s e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y development. W can determine howB l a i r represented this movement and \vhether o r n o t he madevaluable c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o i t . Eig h teen th c e n t u r y l i t e raryc r i t i c i s m l a c k s d e f i n t i o n . Thi s f a i l u r e o f clar i ty i n di-r e c t i o n i n e i g h t e e n t h century c r i t i c i s m i s p a r t l y due t o th en atu re o f some o f i t s concepts. ~ h e y a re o f a kind whichde f y c l e a r - c u t d e l i n e a t i o n . However, t h e s e concepts a re o fvalue and th e f a c t must be faced t h a t his tor ical ly t h e y wereth e f a o t o r s shaping l i t e rary i d e a l s . bla i r ' s R hetoric wasan attem pt t o e x p l a i n and organize t h e s e concepts i n t o as i n g l e p os i ti o n o r a t t i t u d e tovmrd l i terature , and, a s such,th is work de se r ve s t h e study and a t t e n t i o n o f th e s t u d e n t o fl i t e ra ture .

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    7/71

    CHAPTER I IHISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS OF BLAIR'S RHETORICThe Lectures 2a Rhetoric and Belles Lettres of Dr. Hugh

    Blair was f i r s t pUblished a t Edinburgh in l 8 ~ One may notres t content with the bald circumstances of the t i t l e of thiswork, i t s author, and i t s time of pUblication; for i t i s onlythrough a con sideration of the his tor ical backgrounds of thesubject matter, the special status of th is kind of study a tthe time of the pub li ca tion o f th is work, and the specialkind o f treatment which the au thor gives his matter, that thes igni fi cance o f the work may be judged.The term "rhetoric" is a very old one and has signif ied

    many different things a t different times. For the ancientGreeks i t had reference, in i t s primary signif icance, to thea r t of oratory. I t i s in th is sense that we find i t fre-quently used by ancient writers . However, since oratory hadso many elements in common with other departments of l i fe andle t ters , i t is not surprising that the anc ients eventua llycame to include w ithin the term nearly the whole f ield ofeducation, and p a r t i c u l a ~ l y the whole matter of language andl i terature study. I t is not without reason then that theancients thought i t necessary for one who would master th issubject to study with care everything connected with the ob-ject proposed, the convincing and persuading of the hearer orreader. Thus rhetoricians introduced into the i r systems

    4

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    8/71

    5

    t rea t ises on law, morals, aesthet ics and other related subjects on the ground that no one could v ~ i t e or speak wellon these subjects without properly understanding them.

    Aris to t le ' s definition of the term rhetoric as; "thear t of inven ting whatever is persuasive i n d is cou rs e" ,l hadno small share in encouraging the mastery of language andl i terary study. Since th is defini t ion implies the controll ingor influencing of the wills of others , it opened a f ield ofgreat speculation with respect to ways and means of producing this effect . I t is in th is connection that rhetor ioal study came to include the judging, sif t ing and c r i t i oizing of l i terary compositions;2 in the f i r s t instance, wemay suppose, fo r the purpose of judging of the i r convincingor persuading effect , in the course of time, for the purposeof jUdging the i r absolute l i t e rary value. So i t was, then,that in i t s very early stages, the study of rhetoric came toinclude a department of language and l i te ra ture study corresponding to the modern conoept of l i terary cri t ic ism. Inearly rhetorical t rea t ises may be found d iscussions o f s ty le ,of phi losoph ical problems, and of aesthetic matters , a l lreadily comprehended within the term l i t e rary cri t ic ism.

    Thus we find L o n g i n ~ s t reats of the sublime style, arhetorical conception, which M o points out did not orig i-

    1. W. Rhys Roberts, Greek Rhetoric and Literary Cri t i cism, p. 23.2. W. R. Roberts, ~ . c i t . , 50-51.3. Samuel H. Monk, The Sublime in XVIII - CenturyEngland, 10-11. - -

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    9/71

    6

    nate with Longinus but which was current in ancient rhetor ic.Monk says; "the idea that rhetoric is an instrument of e-motional transport was dominant among the ancients, and thegrand style, the purpose of which was to move, was an integralpart of thei r rhetoric. , ,4 other ancients too wrote on vari-ous phases of rhetoric defini tely including problems of l i t e r -ary crit icism. Demetrius wrote Q Style . Dionysius of Ha1 i -carnassus wrote On Literary Composition. Ci c e r o , writing onThe Training 2! orator, gives a threefold function tooratory, namely to teach concil iate and to move. Qu i n t i l i a nin The Ins t i tu tes of oratory had broadened the f ield of ora-tory to include not oDly the study of rhetoric and l i te rarycrit icism as such, but the general education of the youth.

    I t was the l i terary aspect of these notions in the rhe-tor ical t radit ion of the ancients that was the chief concernof the eigh teenth cen tury. The ideas of th e ancien ts onstyle, the ornate, the sublime, beauty , imitation and thepathetic among others were to serve primarily as an influencein crit icism and l a te r in aesthetic theory.

    Rhetoric for the e ighteen th century then was, more orless , an a r t of Literature or Cri tic ism, Campbell's Philoso-

    2! Rhetoric which appeared in 1 ? ? ~ reduces a l l the endsof speaking to four. They were: "to enlighten the under-standing, to please the imagination, to move the passions orto in fluence the w i 1 ~ , 5 Implicit in these four statements

    4. S. H. Monk, .2P. c i t . , 11.5. George Campbell, Philosophy of Rhetoric, p. 23.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    10/71

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    11/71

    8

    tween rhetoric and cri t icism. He says, "the ear l ies t assistance and direction that can be obtained in th e rheto ric&ar t , by which men operate on the minds of others, arises fromthe consciousness a man has of what operates on his own mind,aided by the sympathetic feelings, and by the pract ical experience of mankind whioh individuals, even in the rudeststate of society, are capable of acquiring. The next step isto observe and discriminate by proper appellat ions, the differ-ent attempts, whether modes of arguing or forms of speech,that have been employed for the purposes of explaining, oonvincing, pleasing, moving and persuading. Here we have thebeginning of the cr i t i ca l science.,,9

    I t is cri t ic ism, therefore, tha t has developed the rulesand principles of rhetoric. He would not have us concludetha t the rules of rhetoric are arbi trary. They are derivedfrom a oareful examination of the great works which have beenadmired as beautiful in every age.

    We have here to do vdth ori t ic ism, only so fa r as i tpertains to the works of l i t e ra ture . The rules of good writing having been deduced in the manner described above , thee ighteenth cen tury thOUght i t the business of the cri t io toemploy them as a standard, by a judicious comparison withwhich he may distinguish what is beautiful and what is faultyin every performance. but this jUdicious comparison impliesth e ex istence in the human mind of a faculty capable of forming opinions re spec ting the l i te rary value of a work. Such

    9. George Campbell, .2P.. c i t . , 19-20.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    12/71

    9

    a facul ty does exis t , sa id the eighteenth century. I t extendsto a l l creations of nature and a r t . Thi s f aculty is " Tas te " .

    This introduced into t he lite rar y c r i t ic ism of the cent u-ry wha t appeared to be a very dis turb ing pr obl em. As Hookersays,

    the at tempt to de fine and a r r ive a t a s tandard oftas te l ies a t the hea r t of t he aesthe t ic inquir i esthat were being carried on i n e ight eent h centu ryEngl and . Tha t such i nquir ie s by examini ng cer ta infundamenta l assumptions of t radit iona l ae s t h e t i c s ,exerted an influence on the theory and pract i ce ofl i terary cr i t ic ism, is a commonplace. But VIDY andhow this influence was fe l t has not been exami ned .I ts importance can be gauged by the fac t t ha t with in a per i od of twenty years severa l of t he ab les tminds in England and Scot land, includ ing Burke ,Hume , Hoga r t h , Kames , Reynolds and Gerard, most ofthem interested in l i t e ra ry c ri t i c i sm, wer e fo cus edupon the pr obl em of "Tas te" .LO

    Accord i ng to Saint sbury , t he i nquir ie s in aesthet ic contr ibuted ,"to t he freeing of c ri t i c i sm f r om t he shackle s in which i t hadl a in so long" . l l Bosker pi c tur es the i nvest i ga t ion of t as teas occupying "an i nte rmediate posi t ion between the ext remedevotees of reason and t he pr ecurs ors of a new cr i t ica l out 100k".12 Hooker t h inks t here i s much t o be sa id for both ac -counts, but t hey are too gen eral to give a clear account ofwha t was happening. l 3 A mor e sugge st ive idea i s presented by

    10. Edward N. Hooker, "The Discussions of Tas te from1750 to 1770, and the rew Tr ends i n Literary Cr i t i c ism ,"Publication Modern Language Assoc ia t i on ,_XLIX (June, 1934 ), 57711. George Saintsbury, . c i t . , I I I , 16412. Aisso Bosker, Literary c r i t i c i sm i n the Age ofJohnson, 14213. E. N. Hooker , loco c i t . , 578

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    13/71

    10

    Bosanquet, who observed that Shaftesbury and Lord Kames, amongothers were in te re st ed ; " in the adjustment of modern aesthet ic 'feeling, always comparatively speaking somewhat Romant i c , tothe classical t radit ion, represented a t f i r s t by conventionalconceptions of Aristot le and of Greek beaut y, and then, ascriticism deepened, by something nearer the real Ar i s t ot l e andreal Greek ar t and poetry".14

    In the midst of a l l this speculation we must not losesight of the fact that the age was s t i l l genuinely interestedin rhetoric . Monk observes tha t , " th is in teres t was manifestdue to the fact that around the seventeen-s ix t ies there werepUblished and sold several works whose systems of oratorywere derived direct ly from the rhetoricians " .15 A Syst em ofOratory by John Wa rd16 in 1759 is a work derived from such asource. He talks about sublime sentiment s , thoughts and s tyles .The book is composed of lectures delivered a t Gresham Collegeduring Wards tenure of a professorship, from about 1720-1758.The r e i s nothing in the leotures t hat has not been said before.Another work was Lectures Concerning oratory.17 I t drew onthe rhetoricians both for style and content. A cont roversyconcerning 't he authorship of an ar t ic le on El oquence wh i chwas published in the ~ e e 1 8 in 1759 g ives another phase of

    14. Bernard :Bo.sanquet, A History of Aest het i c p , 181.15. S. H. Monk , E. oi t . , p. 10716. John Ward, ! System oratory17. John Lanson, Lectures uoncerning Oratory18. Oliver Goldsmith, "Of Eloquence" , The Bee pp. 195-198.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    14/71

    11

    the interest in rhetoric and aesthetic . I t t reats the re -lat ionship of the pathetic vdth eloquence and the patheticwith the sublime. The Art of poetry.2!! a New Plan19 pUblished in 1?62 and dubiously attr ibuted to John Newberry is a workwhich discusses a t length the merit of Longinus, the sublim ityof the Bible, Homer, M l t on , of epic, tragedy and ode but,says M.onk, "nothing new can be learned from i t" .20 DanielWebb, another minor author is concerned vdth the dist inct ionbetween the sublime and the beaut iful . He sought to predicate of poetry what he knew of music. He called them "sis terar ts" . He conceived the idea tha t in music we are t ransported by sudden t ransi t ions and that music is capable of arousi ng te r ro r . I t is associated vdth sub limity in i t s suspensefrom note to note, and the cumulative effect of tones, serves,as does a series of images in poetry, "to exalt us above ourselves".2l

    I t has seemed advisable to touch upon a few of theseminor works in order not to lose s ight of the varied in tere$sof the time and part icular ly to avoid giving the impressionthat the longer t rea t i ses are typical of a l l speculat ion 'during the period. Space does not permit th e d is cuss ion, noris i t of importance a t this point to consider other works of

    19. John Newberry, The Art of Poetry .Q!! New Plan20. S. H. Monk , 2. c i t . p. 10?21. Daniel Webb, Observations the Correspondence between Poetry and Music 8, 9, 16 and 25.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    15/71

    12a major or minor importanoe. e sha l l have to touoh uponthem la te r in studing l a i r ' s par t ioula r not i ons in order tojudge whether or not he was gi ving a repr esent a t i v e eighteenthoentury trea tment to the matters under oonsideration . I twould not be possib l e to d isous s at l ength , i n any instanoe ,t he wealt h or mate r i a l whioh i s available . As onk observes ,"so rioh i s t he de oade of t he seventeen - six t ies in ori t ioaland aesthetio doouments t hat one is rather embarrassed by asuperf lui ty of material to vmioh t o re f er" . 22 I t is againstsuoh a baokgr ound of r hetorioal t r ad i t i on and aesthetic confus ion tha t Dr . Blair ' s work on rhetor ic emer ges . His oareeras a rhetorician i s influenced gr eat ly by t he in terest of thetime in aesthetic theory. The i nvest i ga t ion by orit i cs ofthe century into t he ae s t h e t i o notions implio i t in the ancientrhetorica l trad i t i on had a gr eat par t i n shaping Blai r ' s a t t i tude toward t he whole f ield of litera ry matters .

    He was a member of t he di s t i nguished l i te r ary oirclef l our i s hi ng a t Edinburgh t hroughout the century . e vas alsoa member with Hume , A. Car lyle , Adam Fe rguson , Adam Smith ,Rober t s on and others of t he famous Poker Cl u b .

    I t was l a i r who f i r s t read lectures on rhetor ic in theUniversity of Edinburgh beginning i n 1759. A year l a te r hewas chosen as pro f e s so r of r hetoric by the magistrate s andtown council of Edi nburgh . I n 1762 hi s maj esty ereoted andendowed a Pr of es s i on of Rhetorio and tle l les Lettres in the

    22 . H. Monk, 2. oi t . 107

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    16/71

    13

    University and bla i r was appointed f i r s t Regius Professor.These appointments indicate the general estimate of Blai r ' smerit as a rhetorician and cr i t i c .

    Saintsbury says,that bla i r i s to be part icular ly commended for ac-cepting to the fu l l the important t ru th that , "rhe-torid ' in modern times real ly means ." cr i t i c i sm" ; andfor doing a l l he can to destroy the notion, author-ized too far by ancient cr i t ios , and encouraged bythose of the Renaissance, that Tropes and Figuresare not possibly useful classif icat ions and names,but f i l l a real arsenal of weapons, a real cabinetof reagents, by the employment of which the prac-t i t ioner oan refute or convince or delight , as thecase may be. 23Blair views rhetoric in a twofold manner as, a specula-

    t ive scienoe and a pract ical a r t . As a science i t invest i -gates, analyzes and defines the principles of good compo-si t ion . As an ar t , i t enables us to apply these principles ,or to express our thoughts in a f i t t ing manner. 24

    From the study of rhetoric he saw two great advant a ges;f i r s t i t enables us to discern faults and beauties in thecomposition of others; secondly, i t teaches us how to expressand embellish our own thoughts, so as to produce the mostforcible expressions. "Whatever enables genius to executewell, will enable tas te to cr i t ic ize just ly .n25

    "He concerned himself with the pract ical side or rhetoricand composi tion ," says Henn, "and he enables us to understand

    23. George Saintsbury, 2E. c i t . , I I , 463.24. Rhetoric, p. 1325. Rhetoric, p. 13

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    17/71

    14

    more oleaI1Y the un i on be tween r het roi o and or i t io ism.,,26Blai r admits tha t at times r he t or io and or i t i o i s m have

    been badly managed so t hat t hey have tended "tal rd oorruptionr ather t ha t to t he improvement of good tas te and eloquenoe" .But , he says , " i t i s equally possible to apply the pr i ne i lesor reason and good sense to th i s art" .2? He ohose, t here f ore," to substit ute the applioation of t hese rino i ples in theplaoe of an ar t i f ioia l and soholastio rhetorio; in an en-deavor to explode fa l s e ornament , t o di reot a t t ent i on mo re to -ward substanoe than show, to reoommend good sense as the foun -dation of al l good oompos i t i o n , and simplioity as essent ia lt o al l true ornament . 28

    Thus Bl a i r at taohes great s i gni f i oanoe to the study ofgenui ne rhetorio f or he be l i eved that "writ ing and disooursear e objeots enti t led to the highest a t t entionn29 beoausethey enable us "to express our t hought s with propriety andeloquenoe".30 He observes also tha t " t h i s st udy has pos -sessed a oonsiderable pl aoe i n the plan of l ibera l eduoat ionin a l l t he pol i s hed na t i ons of' Europe" .3 l He points outfur ther "a fundamenta l pr i n o i p l e among the anoients; t hat

    26 . '11. R. Henn , .2.l? c t t , , p . 10?2? Rhetorio, p . 1028 . Ibid. , p . 1029 . Ibid . , p . 930 . Ib id. , p. 1031 . Ib i d . , y . 10

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    18/71

    15the orator ought to be an accomplished scholar".32 This, otcourse, because "the study ot rhetoric supposes and requiresa proper acquaintance with the res t or the l i b e r a l artsn33and i t i s intimately connected with the improvement ot ourintel lectual powers . He real izes that mere rhetorical rulescannot form an orator but they can assis t and point out theproper modes ot ' imitat ion ' and improve ' t a s t e ' .

    Though Blair ' s notions on rhetoric were current ineighteenth century t reat ises , it is not in rh eto ric but incri t icism that he approaches the rea l problems or l i te raryin terests .

    "Criticism is the application of tas te and good senseto the several t ine a r t s . ,,34 As was noted above a distinct:icnmust be made between what i s beautiful from wha t i s faul ty.I t should torm rules concerning the various kinds of beautyin works of genius. This seems to express uampbel l ' s35thought on the development of the cr i t i ca l ar t , and as hepointed out cri t icism is an a r t f ounded on experience.

    As rhetoric has been sometimes t hought tosignify nothing more than the scholastic studyof words, phrases and tropes so crit icism hasbeen considered merely as the a r t of f indingfaul ts ; as the t r ig id application of certaintechnical terms by means of Which persons aretaught to cavil and censure in a learned manner.36

    32. Rhetoric, p. 1033 . Ibid. , p. 1034. Ibid . , p . 2735 . George Campbell, .2], . c i t . , p. 2036. Rhetoric, p. 13

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    19/71

    16.!:Jut, he says,

    th is is the crit icism of pedants only. True cr i t i -cism is a l ibe ra l and humane a r t . I t is the offspringof good sense and refined tas te . I t aims a t acquiringa just discernment or the real merit of authors. I tpromotes a l ively re l ish of b e a u t i e s ~ while i t preserves us from tha t blind and implicit venerationwhich would confound the i r beauties and faults inour esteem. I t teaches us in a word to admire andblame with judgment.37The notion that the cr i t ics duty is to poi nt out the

    beautiful rather than the faulty i s a view frequently statedin the cr i t ica l l i terature of the time. Bosker says,

    this may have been suggested to t he pseudo-classiccri t ics by Horace's Ars Poet i ca , but the development of th is new conception was largely due to t heinfluence of Longi nus , which apa r t from a f ew occas ional references may be said to have begun inthe year l 6 7 4 ~ af te r the appearanoe of Bo i l e a u ' st ranslat ion. 50n develops another interest ing thought regard ing t he

    influence of Longinus on the l i t e rary cr it icism of t he centu -ry . He finds that thought Longinus is well with in t he t ra -dit ion of ancient rhetoric when he t reats t he sublime s tyl eas emotive in purpose,

    . the subject he wrote on was an old ques t i on inrhetoric , and he might easi ly have repeated t heold formulae and i l lustra ted the old f igures thatwere conventionally regarded as being conduc i veto sublimity; he might have done th i s and no mor e .But he was a t the same time rhetorician and cr i t ic ,and as a cr i t ic he saw more deeply into the na tureof ar t than did most of his fel lows. His cr i t ica lintui t ions found the ir way into his t rea t i se ,where they lay dormant unt i l they became in a

    37. Rhetoric, p. 1338. A. Bosker, .2. c i t . , p. 18

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    20/71

    17la te r age and among a modern race, an inrluence incriticism and aesthetic theory.39I t was Longinus's notions on sublimity that was or chier

    in terest . The implications in l i terary crit icism developingrrom the idea or the sublime style and rrom sublimity i t se l fwere a t once heightened by the new in terest in Longinus. I ti s easy to distinguish between them, as Monk points out, ro r"to write on sublimity i s to write on aesthetic while to v ~ i t eon the sublime style is to write on rhetoric".40

    Though Longinus did not consider emotion as absolutelynecessary to sublimity, he nevertheless, as Monk observes"habitually associates the two,,,41 "since the orator 's taskwas to persuade by affecting the emotions of his audience asv ~ l l as by convincing thei r reason l t 42 The point o f departu refor the eighteenth century was the presence or emotion in a and the importance of Longinus' purely conventional and rhetor ica l ideas on the relat ion between the sublime and thepathetic becomes increasingly evident as the quan tity oraesthetic speculation increases.,,43

    From what has been said i t i s evident that the eighteenth

    39. S. H. Monk, .Q.E.. c i t . , 1240. ~ . p , 1241. Ib id . , p , 1442. Ib id . , p. 14. Monk quotes Longinus as his authorityfor th is statement. Dionysius Longinus, On the Sublime t ranslated from the Greek by v1.m. Smith D.D. Fourth Edition -London .1770 pp. 25-27.43. S. H. Monk, .Q.E.. c i t . , 14

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    21/71

    18o en tu ry oonoept o f l i terary c r i t i o i s m i s founded l a rg e l y onLonginus. The attemp t to fin d an d es ta b l i s h same kind ofstandards o r pr i nc i pl e s i n e a u t y , Subl imi t y an d Imit a t i ondeveloped th e cr i t i ca l notions on Ta s t e . Beaut y was givena d d i t i o n a l importance i n t h e new met hod of cr i t ic i sm ~ i c hmode i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t o f i n d a s tandard f o r tleau t y .

    These fo u r p o in ts a re c h i e f l y involved i n th e Longi n i and i s c u s s i o n s . S inc e B l a i r l i k e o t h e r w ri t er s of t he cen tu rywas d i r e c t l y influenced by t h e s e n o t i ons we sha l l examineh i s work t o see what he d id vdth them. Thi s wi l l b ri ng us t oth e h e a r t o f h i s co n cep ts on t h e c h i e f l i t e ra ry pr obl ems o fth e century.

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    22/71

    CHAPrER I I IBLAIR'S CONCEPT OF BEAUTY

    Many attempts had been made to di s cover in what thebeau ti fu l cons is ts ; what quality i t i s , whi ch a l l beautifulobjects possess, and wrrich i s t he foundati on of the 'agreeablesensations' they produce. In part icular , uniformity admidstvariety had been insisted upon as th is fundamental quali ty.But Blair maintains that no theory has been advanced on th issUbject which is not open to objection. I t seems, accordingto bla i r ' s view of the matter, as i t , t he var ious ob ject scalled beautiful , are so by vir tue not of anyone pr inc ip lecommon to al l , .but of several di fferent pr i ncip l es l ike ly t obe found in each beautiful object . Consequent l y i t is noteasy to isolate Blair ' s concept of the beaut i fu l . No workhas been done in th is f ield and i t i s for th i s reason par -t icular ly , as well as for the fac t tha t bl a i r is an i mpor t antfigure in eighteenth century l i terary cr i t ic i sm t hat somenotion of his concept of the beautiful should be of in teres t .

    I t i s 'my purpose then to present wha t I conce i ve to behis notion of the beautiful and to establ ish my pr esentat i o nby a careful examination of t he text .

    Blair defined beauty as a combinat i on of qual i t i e s whichdo not afford the imagination as much pleasure a s subl imi ty,and render an 'agreeable sens at i on ' not thrOUgh impas s ionedvehement, or elevated language but rather by means of a gent le ,

    19

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    23/71

    ich

    in 1 -

    th in t 11 c toc ss b

    i n ion e.to i t b th

    concep ion , 00 b in s th

    d 8er n o ion , r1 ot . l

    h r 0 hr 0 iv 8 1mpr 88 i ons 0 0

    1 o ti of thein to ne 01 8 of i t s 0 0 ion . Tthe e m t ent i on d in the def ini t ion ,i s t hat enever a beaut i fu l object i s pr s nt d to th minda t rain of t hought i s i edia t el y a ken d simil r in 0 r c -t r to t he objeot exoit i ng i t . I t i s t ru hat th sublimand the beaut i f u l both xoi te t h imagin ion , but th ecota r oused by the qual i t i s of beauty and sublimity r o f adif fe rent kind from eaoh other .

    t l lair sought t o de f ine bea u t y by d is t inguishin i t IrosUblimity . eauty, he th inks, do s not afford the i -

    ro -

    nation so gr ea t a pl easure a s subl imi t y. The emot i ons ia rouse s are easi ly d i s t inguished f r om thos or sublimi y . I ti s calmer and mo r g nt l e . and i s oaloulated , no t so much toelevate the mind as to produce in i t an ' able s reni t ' 2"Subl imi t y r a is es a fee l i ng to o viol ent t o blasting ," hsays, "the pl e a sure a r is i n f rom beauty dmit ot 1 0 rduration ."3 Beauty i s , by f ar , a or g neral m an otduci pl ea sure beoause nth f eel in s ich b au t i tu l obj ots

    1 . Rhetoric , p 49 -502 . Ibid p . 503 . Ib i . , p . 50

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    24/71

    21

    produce dirfer considerably, not in degree only, but also inkind from one another."

    Hence, no word in the language is used in a mor evague signif icat ion than be auty. I t is appliedto almost every exte rnal object whi ch pl ea s es theeye or ear; to a gr eat number of graces of wri t ing;to many disposit ions of the mind; nay, to severalobjects or mere abstract science.4Thus , Blair shows t he confusion whi ch pr eva i l ed around

    the idea of beauty. He too, I believe, would have l iked torind a f i t t ing solution to the problem whi ch so many othershad attempted to answer. Namel y , what i s the fundamentalquality of beautr? He evades the question but proposes toselect several classes or object s in which beauty appearsand to give the separate principles of beauty in each of them.5

    The f i r s t or these is color. He t reats color r i r s t be-cause i t a r f o r ~ w h a t he cal ls , 'the simples t ins t ance orbeauty ' . He at t r ibutes t he pl e a sure we r ece i ve r r om t hebeauty of color to t he structure of the eye wh ich is able t oreceive more pleasure rrom some modirications or the r ays orl igh t than others. Yet , he observes, we r i nd s ome pecu li ar i t ies belonging to color which, in the es t imation of al l ,enhance the i r beauty. They must be delica te ra ther t hanstrong. I f the colors are strong and vivid, they must bemingled and con tra st ed vd th each ot he r , t he s t rength andglare of each being thus subdued. Thi s const i tutes the charmof var iegated f lowers. The association or ideas may ort en

    4 . Rhetoric, p. 505. Ib id . , p. 50

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    25/71

    22

    contribute to the pleasure received. "Green, for instance,may appear mor e beautiful from being connected in our mindswith rura l scenes; white, from i t s being a type of innocenoe;and blue, from i t s association with t he serenity of t he sky. n6

    These various t ra i t s then are found to char a ct e r ize thebeautiful colors which nature everywhere employs to renderher works attract ive, and which ar t finds i t extremely di f f i -oult to imitate. feathers of birds, t he f lo ra l creations ,the sunset sky and any blending of del i cate shades pr e s ent"the h ighest ins tances 01' beauty of coloring and have accordingly been the favorite subject of poet i cal desc r ip t ions ina l l countries" .?

    Another source of the be aut i f ul is figu r e. Bla i r dividesthe foundation of beauty in figure between r egular i ty andvariety. Regular figures such as circ les , s quares and t r ianglesare, as a general rule, beau t i f ul . He contends t hat t he mindunconso ious ly connects with wel l - pr opor t i oned forms t he ideaof practical adaptations to some useful end. He warns thatregular i ty, as used here, does not involve t he i dea of sameness ,which would t i re and di s gus t t he eye; on t he cont r a r y, vari etyis generally united with i t in the mos t a t t rao t ive works ofnature. 8

    Gradual variation in t he parts unit ing to f orm a wholeseems to be one of the commonest sources of natural beautyin figures, says Blai r . There is generally a cons t a nt change

    6. Rhetoric, pp . 50-51? ~ . p . 518 . ~ . p . 51

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    26/71

    23

    of direotion in the outline, but i t is so gradual that werind i t diff ioul t to determine i t s begi nn ing or end. uurvesohange the ir direotion a t every point and hence afford thecommonest instan ces of gradual variat ion. Gi r cular f i guresare, therefore, Bl a i r thinks, generally mor e beaut i ful thanthose bounded by st raight l ines . I n this respect Hl a i r c i t esMr . Hogarth,9 who he says makes beauty of f i gures cons is tchiefly - in the preponderance of two ourves, vm ioh he cal l s ,the l ine of beauty and the l ine of' grace. "The one i s awaving l ine, or curve bending backwards and forwards , some what in the f'orm of the l e t t e r . l

    Mot i on is another source or beauty . Her e Bl a i r aga instresses t he di s t i nct i on between the bea ut i ful and the sublime.Mot i on , he maintains, is an element of beauty only when i t isgentle in charaoter . When very swif t or rorcible , i t becomessublime. "The motion of a b ird gliding t.hr-ough :the a ir or '(a placid brook is beaut i ful "; t hat of the l ightning as i tdarts f'rom heaven, or a might y r iver r ush ing against i t banksi s sUblime. " l l Bl a i r observes f'urther tha t lfthe sensationsof t he SUblime and beautif ul ar e not always di st inguished byvery dis t inot boundar i es; but are capable, i n seve ra l instances ,of approaohing toward each other" .12

    9. wm. Hoggarth, Ana ly s is of Beauty10. Rhe t o r i c , p. 5111. Ibid. , p. 5212. ~ . p. 52

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    27/71

    24o th er th ings being equal, therefore, bodies in motion

    are more at t ract ive than those a t res t and those that move inan 'undulating waving direction ' please us more than thosethat move in straight l ines . Thi s f act is readily account edfor by the close adherence of bla i r ' s theory on motion tot hat of Mr . Hoga r t h ' s principle.

    Such are three of the leading element s of beaut y , pos -sessed in d iffe rent measures, by the various creatio ns ofnature and ar t . Some objects , he not es , comb ine them a l l andthereby become attract ive in the highest degree. Thu s inflowers and birds, "we are entertained at once wi t h color,regulari ty of form, unity in v a r i e t y ~ delicacy and a t time smotion".13 Different sensations are pr oduced by each ofthese qual i t ies , yet they "blend in one general per cept ionof beauty, which we ascribe to the whole object as i t s cause,ror beauty". This is an important idea wi th becaus ebeauty " is al,vays conceived by us as something res i ding inthe object which raises the pl easant sensation" .14

    On the basis of combining the various elements of beautyinto one whole Bl a i r proceeds to discuss the beaut y of thehuman countenance , moral beauty, beauty of design or ar tand beauty as applied to writ ing or d is course.

    In his analysis of t he human countenance he observesthat i t i s more complicated than t hat bel ongi ng to most

    13. Rhetoric, p. 5214. Ib id . , pp. 52-53

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    28/71

    25

    natura l obj ec ts . I t depends a t once on color or complexion;on rigure o r outlin e; and on unity of des ign , that is , theadapta tion o f i t s various p a r ~ s to h purpose f or which theywere formed. chief beauty of oountenance, however , l ie sin what i s called i t s expression or the idea i t conveys re -specting the quali ties of mind . 15

    Fr om the observat ion of beauty in the human countenancei t would appear t hat bl a i r i s led qui te naturally t o a con-sideration of h mora l qual i t ies of beauty . He s t ate s thatthere are two classes of moral qu a l i t i e s . r is a mora lbeauty as well as a moral SUblimity. h l at t er he describesas characterizing great and he r o i c act s , self sacrif ice, fear -lessness and patr iot i sm. The mora l beautiful belongs to thegentler vir tues, affabi l i t y , generos i t y, compassion and thel ike. The emotion t hey excite r es embl es that produced bybeautifu l external ob jec ts . We cannot help to observe howconsistent Bl a i r has been i n drawing the re l at i onshi p betweenbeauty and sublimity nor to not e th e i mpor t ance of the factthat beauty must reside in the natu ral ob jects . 16

    There remains another source of beauty which is found indesign. This i s due chiefly, Bla i r obser ves , to the sk i l l fu lcombination of pa r t s in a whol e , 'o r adaptations of means toan end. The pleasure aris ing f r om t he sense of design isent irely dis t inct from that produced by color, f igure, motion

    15. Rhetoric, p. 5316. Ibid . , pp . 52-53

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    29/71

    26

    o r any o f th e causes pr ev i ous l y oent i oned . Thus , i n a tCh ,la i r poi nt s o u t ,

    we r e c ognize be a uty i n t he e x t e r ion, by r ea sone i t h e r o f th e c o lo r or r e g u la r i t y o f sha pe ; b u tth e p l e a s u r e pr oduced by t he examina t i on of t hei nt erna l machi ner y a r i s e s e n t i r e l y f r om our con sciousness o f de s i gn, our ap r ec i at i on o f t heski l l with which so many complicated ni ece s a reu n i t e d fo r one u s e f u l purpose . l ? -Bl a i r spends c onside r a ble t ime on th i s s ou rce o f bea u t y

    because he f e e l s t h a t is has an i n f l uence i n t he fo rm ationmany o f our opinions . In it we f ind t he f ounda t i o n o f t hebe a u t y whi ch we see i n t he pr opor t i ons o f door s , a rche s ,pil lars and th e l i k e . Bl a i r bel i eves t hat no mat t er how f i neth e ornaments o f a b u i l d i ng may be , t hey l os e most ot t he i ra t t ra c t i o n , unles s , ei ther i n appear ance or r eal i t y, theyle ad t o some usef u l end .18

    He po i n t s out u n d er des ign t h a t t he composer mu s t bec o n s t a n t l y aware o f t h i s pr i n c i pl e . I n a poem, an hi s t oan o ra t i o n , o r any o t h e r l i t e ra ry work , un i t y o f de s ign an dan ad justment o f the p a r t s i n one symme t r i ca l vmo le , ar e a se s s e n t i a l t o e f f e c t a s i n ar ch i t ect u re and o ther a rt s . Heb e l i e ve s t ha t th e f i n e s t descr ip t i ons and t he mo st el egan tf i g u r e s l o s e a l l the i r b e a u t y , o r r at her bec ome act u a l de f o r m i t i e s , u n l e s s connected vd th t he s u b j e c t , and con s i s t e n twith th e l ead i ng design of t he w r i t e r . Le t t he obj e c t ro posed , t h e r e f o r e , be cons t ant l y kept i n vi ew, he warns , andnothing f o r e ign t o i t , h01ever beaut i fu l i n i t se l f , be i nt ro-

    l ? R he tor ic , p . 5418 . I b i d . , p . 54

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    30/71

    duced to distrac t the attention. 19In part icular Blair suggests that in beaut y of writing

    we must avoid using the term, a s many have done, to designateany type of work or styls that plea ses. He gi ve s the te rm amore limited meaning. I t is not to be appl i e d to vmat i simpassioned, sparkling or vehement, but only to that whi chra ises in the reader a gentle, placid emotion, simila r tothat produced by the contemplation of beauty in natu ral ob-jects . 20

    In conclusion then i t has been shovm that Bla i r did notsee f i t to state a fundamental quality of beauty common toa l l beautiful objects. Nor did he accept t hose t ha t wer esuggested because he fe l t that they wer e inadequate . 00n-sequently he placed himself in a posit ion tha t permi t ed himto give a free and complete discussion t o beaut y .

    Blair ' s beauty was next to sublimi t y a means of givingthe greatest pleasure to t as te . I t extends to a l l ob j ect sexcept those of an elevated character . I t does not l i keSUblimity exclude ornament or re quire plainne ss of words ,nor is i t necessari ly confined to ocoasional pa s sages . I tmay characterize an author ' s work thoughout. The emot i onsaroused by beauty are calm. I t is meant not so much to

    'elevate ' as to produce an ' agreeable seren i t y '.

    19. Rhetoric, p. 5420. Ib id . , p. 55

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    31/71

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    32/71

    l ieves , i s vas tness.29

    ide extended plains , t o mich the eyesees no l imit; the f i rmament of heaven or t he boundless ex-panse of ocean al l f urn i sh ramiliar examples of t s .

    h o u g h al l vastnes s produces the impress ion or s U b l i m i ~ he t hi nks t hat t hi s impre ss i on i s less vivid in objects ex-te nded in length or breadth t han in such a s ar e vast by reasonof t heir height or depth. A bound less plain i s an ob j e c t ofgrandeur but a h igh mount ain to \vhich we look up or an awf'ulprec ip i ce f r om whi ch we contemplat e objects benea th is s t i l lgr e at e r . Thus , though all vas t ness i s an important elementin Blai r ' s sublime, he would not have us infe r f r om ~ ha sbeen said about vastness of extent, tha t i t i s the "founda t ion01' a l l sublimity" . 6

    The solemn and the t er r ible are also important elementsin hi s SUblime. Darkness so l itude and silence , which have atendency to f i l l t he mind with awe , cont r ibute much towardSUblimity. I t i s i nte rest ing i n th is connec t ion to note thean t i cipat i on of Engl i sh Homan t i c notions in t l lair ' s subl imewhen he observe s that ; " i t is not the gay landscape , t hef l ower y f i e l d , or t he f l our i shing ci ty that produces t heemotion of grandeur; but t he hoary mountain , and t he so l i taryl ake; the aged fore s t and th e to r rent fa l l ing dovm a pr ec ipice" .7

    Obscuri ty i s a n o t h e ~ sourc e of t he sublime . He be l ieve st hat vmen th ings ar e i nvis ibl e and the imagination is givena f r ee hand t he obscurity and uncertainty f i l l the mind \n th

    6. Rhetor ic , p . 327 . Ib id ., p . 33

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    33/71

    30

    indescribable awe. Thus he finds that descriptions of supernatural beings are characterized by sUblimity, though theideas they give are confused and indis t inct . He at t r ibutesthis sUblimity to thei r superior power , the obscuri ty wit hwhich they are veiled and t he awe t hey awaken in the mind.8

    ideas, it i s plain says Hl a i r , are so sublimeas those taken from t he Supr eme Being ; the mostunknown, but t he greatest of al l objects ; theinf in i ty of whose nature, and the ete r n i t y ofwhose duration, joined \n t h t he omnipotence ofHis power, though they surpas s our concepti9ns ,yet exalt them to the highest. 9He considers disorder too as a means of frequent ly pro-

    ducing sUblimity. I f we gaze a t th ings s t r ic t ly regular inthe i r outl ine and methodica l in t he arrangement of the i rparts , he th i n k s , we fe e l a sense of confinement i n c o m p a t i b with mental expression. He grants that such 'exact proportion'may often enter into t he beautifu l but does not have a placein the sublime. "A gr eat mass of r ocks th rown together bythe hand of nature wi th wi ldnes s and confusion , s t r ike themi nd with mor e grandeur , than i f they had been adjusted toone another with the most accurate symmetry .1I10

    Besides the object s ment i oned above as conducive tosUblimity, Bl a i r includes one more class of sublime objectswhich produce what he chooses to ca l l " the moral or sent i mental"ll sublime. They consist of t he gr eat and heroic

    8. Rhetoric, p. 349. Ibid. , pp . 34-35

    10. Ibid. , p. 3511. ~ . p . 35

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    34/71

    31feelings and acts of men. When in an extremely cr i t i ca l pos i t ion , a person forgets a l l s el fi sh i nt er es ts and is cont rol led by highly unselr ish principles, we have an ins t anceof the moral sublime.

    'l'he most f rui t fu l sources of mora l sUblimity, it wouldseem, are these: firmness in the cause of t ruth and just ice;generous self-sacrif ice in behalr of another; fe arlessnessin the f ace or danger and great patr io t ism. W may classifythese under the name of "magnanimity or her oi sm. They pr o-duce an effect extremely sim ilar to what i s pr oduced by theview of grand objects in nature; f i l l ing t he mi nd with admi ration and elevating "i t above i t se l f . nl B

    After enumerating a variety of ins tances "wher e t he sub-lime i s f ound , Hl a i r asks, as he d id concerning beauty ,vmether or not there i s a f undamenta l qual i ty in wh ich al lthese objects agree and whi ch i s the cause of t he ir produci ngt he SUblime emotion. Her e as i n t he case of beauty he de clines to commit himsel f defini tely as t o i t s na ture.

    He rejects burk ' s 1 3 too restr icted view of the sub limethough he acknowledges his indebtedne ss to him f or s evera lideas on SUblimity. Hlair says,

    the author of a Philosophical Enqu i r y into t heOrigin of our Ideas of the Sub l ime and the beaut i fu l , to whom we are indebted for severa l in genious and original thoughts upon th is SUb ject ,

    lB. Rhetoric, p. 3513. Edmund Hurke, A Philosophical Enqui ry into t heOrigin of Ideas the l:3ublime and beaut i1 'u . l - - - -

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    35/71

    32

    pr oposes a formal theory upon this t'ound.atLon,that ter ror is the souroe of the sUblime, andthat no objects have th is charaoter but such as "produce impressions of pain and danger. I t isindeed true , that many ter r ib le objects arehighly sUblime; and that grandeur does not re -fuse an alliance with . the idea of danger . ~ u though th is is very properly i l lus t ra ted bythe author, (many of whose sentiments on tha thead I have adopted, ) yet he seems to st retchhis theory too far , when he represents thesublime as consisting wholly in modes ofdanger, or of pain. l 4

    ~ l a i r proceeds to point out fur ther thatin many grand objeots, there is no coincidencewith ter ror a t a l l ; as in the magni f i cent pr o-spect of wide extended plains, and of thes tarry firmament ; or in the moral disposi t ionsand sentiments, which we view with high admiration; and in many painful and ter r ib le objects a l s o ~ i t is clear there i s no sor t ofgrandeur. l oBlai r goes so far as to say that , i f there is any funda

    mental quality in which a l l these objects agree and wh i ch i sthe cause of thei r producing the subl ime emotion, he is "in-clined to think that mighty power or force whet her a ccompani edwith ter ror or nat, whether employed in protecting or a larming,has a bet ter t i t l e , than anything that has yet been ment i oned ,to be the fundamental quali ty of the sUblime".16 But hecloses th is discussion by saying that "even th is does notseem sufficient on which to found a genera l theory"l? andthough th is has not been "possible he hopes that by the dis-cussion of these objects he has given a proper foundation

    14. Rhetoric, p . 3715 . " Ibid . , p . 3716 . Ibid . , p . 37l ? Ibid . , p . 3?

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    36/71

    33for discussing the sublime in v ~ 1 t i n g .

    We find then, tha t for a l i t e ra ry composition to pos s e s ssublimity, i t 1s necessa ry that t he sUb j ect be subl ime. Ascene or natural object must be one vm ich , i f exhibited tous in rea l i ty , would inspire us with t houghts of the elevated,awrul and magnificent character that has been desc r ibed. Thisexcludes what i s mer el y beaut i fu l , gay or elegant. l 8

    To give effect to the descript ion of a sublime object ,Blair would employ a clear, concise, s t rong and s imp l e styl e .Thi s , he says, wil l follow i f the aut hor has a " l i v ely im-pression" of his subject . I f his OVID enthus i asm i s notawakened, he cannot hope to exci te emot ion in others . Allforced attempts have just the opposite effect from what isintended. l 9

    He points out a l s o that conc iseness is one of the mostimportant essentials of sublimity in v i t n The greatestt hought s must be pr e sent ed in t he f ewest words . He cal lsour attention to the i l l ust rat ion s f rom Homer and Ossian .I f they are examined we shal l f ind tha t they were chosen,Blair thinks, be caus e no words are i nt roduced unless theyare essent ial to the idea.

    Simplicity is no less essentia l to sub limi ty than conciseness. rl lair woul d have the wor ds employed not only fewbut plain. Hi gh - f l own and turgid express ions must be avoidedno less care f'ul1y than mean , low and t r iv ia l ones . Ornament,

    18. R hetoric, p. 3919. Ib id . , p . 39

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    37/71

    34

    however oonducive to beauty of style is here out of place.Noth ing , Blair observes is more mistaken than to suppose tha tmagnificent word s , accumulated epithets , and swelling ex-pression consti tute elevation.

    Bl a i r i l lus t ra tes these thoughts by ca l l ing our attentionto wha t Longi nus and other cr i t i cs have observed regardingsublimity. Longinus and a l l cr i t i cs from his time to thepresent have concurred i n at tr ibut ing the hi ghes t sUblimityto the verse in Gene s i s which describ es t he creation ofl ight . 20 "And God said, Let there be light: and there wasl ight ."

    We shal l find then t hat t he passages genera l ly accountedsublime by Hlair are , for the most par t , descrip t i ons of thenatural objects he has mentioned wh ich are capable of pr o-ducing the emotions of sUb limity, or i n other words of vmati s vast , mighty, magnificen t , obscure, dark, s olemn , l oud,pathetic or ter r ible . I t i s with thes e e lements tha t tll a i rfashions his sublime.

    20. RhetoriJ, p , 40

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    38/71

    GHAPTER VBLAIR' S GO CEPT OF TATION

    Before we proceed vd th the consideration of tll a i r ' s ideason imi ta t i on and 1aste we ,r l l l be aided gr e a t l y i f ~ keep inmind t he fa ct tha t tleauty and ~ b l i m i t y have been consideredas qual i t i e s r esiding i n obj ec t s judged to be beautiful or sub -l ime, as the ca se may be . 'hes e qual i t i e s have t he power ofpr oducing ' agr eeabl e sens at i ons ' in the instance of beauty and' in te rna l el evat ion ' in t he i nstance of Subl imity . Imi ta t i o nand 'la s t e ar e t o be consIde red qui te d if ferently . e m lltre a t Imitation as a pr oces s of producing beauty and sUblimityand t as a f aculty fo r appreciat ing beauty and subl imity .

    Per haps i t wil l help us here t o understand bla i r 's t houghton Imita t ion and the dist inc t ion made between Imi t a t i on andDescription , i f we r ecal l the chaos in l i t e rary cri t icismbrought about by the various inte rpr et a t i ons of Ar i s t o t l e ' sidea t hat ' ar t imita t es nature ' . This r e sul t ed i n cer tainideas implic i t in th is phra s e becoming fundamental i n eighteenthcentury t heor i e s on Imi t a t ion .

    In this connec t ion Bla i r points out t hat ,i t i s usua l among cr i t ic a l writers , to speak ofdiscou rse as the chi ef of all the imitative ormimetic a r t s ; they compar e i t with painting andwith SCulp tu re , and i n many r espec t s pr e f e r itjust ly before them. 'his s tyl e ,vas f i r s t in troduced by Ar i s t o t l e in hi s poe t i cs ; and , sincehis t ime, has acqui red a genera l currency amongmodern authors . l1 . Rhet oric , p . 56

    35

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    39/71

    36

    Blair takes exception to th is pos i t ion be caus e he believes thatth is manner of speaking is not accura t e . He says,

    neither discourse in general or poetry in part icular ,can be called altogether imitat ive ar ts . We mus tdistinguish between Imitat ion and Description whichare ideas that should not be confounded. Imitat ioni s performed by means of s omewhat t ha t has a nat ura ll ikeness and resemblance t o the thing imitated, andof consequence is understood by a l l ; such are s tatuesand pictures. De s cr i pt i on , aga in , i s ra is ing i n themind the conception of an ob jec t by means of somearbi t rary or inst i tuted symbols , unders t ood onl y bythose who agree i n the ins t i t u t ion of t hem; such arew o ~ d s and writing. 2So to t rea t of the power of Imi tat ion through writing and

    discourse Bl a i r was forced to f ree himse l f f r om his t oo narrowmeaning of Imitation ,by dis t ingui shing i t from Descript i on .Havi ng made the dist inct ion he does not hesi tate t o agr ee t hat"there is nothing i n the moral or natural world , but what canbe set before the mind i n colors very strong and l ively,,,3 andth is "by the use of words and wr i t ing" . 4Blai r gives another basis fo r his di st inct ion between Imi -tat ion and Description. He says,

    words have no natural resemb lance to the i deas orobjects wh i ch they are employed to s ign i fy ; but astatue or a picture has a na tura l l ikeness to theoriginal . And there fore Imitat i on and Descriptiond iffe r considerably in the i r na ture f r om each other . 5A work of a r t th en reproduces i t s origina l , not as i t is

    in i t se l f , but as it appears to the senses .

    2. Rhetoric, pp. 56-5'7.3. Ibid. , p. 564. 1lli . , p. 565. Ibid. , p. 5'7

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    40/71

    3?

    Art address i t se l f not to the abstract reason butto the sensibi l i ty and image maki ng raculty; i tis concerned with outward appearance; i t employsi l lusions; i t s wo r l d i s not tha t wh i ch is revealedby pure thought; i t sees t ruth, but in i t s concretemaniresta t ions not as an abs t ra ct i de a. Ar t doesnot at tempt to embody t he ob jec t i v e real i ty orthings, but only t h e i r sensible appearances . 6Aristot le ' s t heory or Imita t i on may be cons i dered in con

    nection with Bl a i r ' s because i t seems that Bla i r was doingsomething vd t h Ar i s t ot l e ' s notions or Imita t i on . I t might beinterest ing t o attempt t o jUdge or the r ul l signiricance orth is , but r or the purpos es or t hi s s tudy i t wi l l be merelynoted that there ar e certa in Ar i sto t el ian notions i n tll a i r ' stheory.

    Bl a i r ' s Imita t ion was a source or pleasure . I t was thewor k or a f acul t y of tas te in t h i s relationship to r eceivepleasure rrom t he re produc t i ons or nature by comparing the c0P.1with the origina l . Thus he r inds the closer the resemblancethe copy bears to the origina l the greater pleasure does i tafford.? l e ar e pl eased , the r efore , when Imit a t i on recal lsthe origina l ideas of beauty and SUblimity . Nor is th i s lesstrue even though t he objec t copied be desti tute of beauty oris repulsiye. Hence we may endur e in Imitation , Bl a ir believes ,what in l i fe we woul d turn away f r om in horror .

    He believes t ha t eloquence and poet ry afford the gr eat es t

    . 6. Samuel H. Butcher, Ar i s t ot l e ' s T h e o r of Poetry andF1ne Art (Butcher uses as a s ource f or t his s tatement , "TheECnffiuIer Aristotel iche For chungen , I I 145-1 5 8 )?Rhetoric, p . 55

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    41/71

    38

    pleasure to taste and the imaginat ion8 beoause " they have agreater oapaoity of Imita t i on and Descr i pt i on t han i s possessedby any other ar t " .9 Word s and writing have t he gr eatest powerf or recal l ing the images of rea l objects and awakening , by r e -presentations s imilar emot ions t o those whi ch ar e r a ised by theoriginal. 10

    ~ l a i r makes an except i on to hi s theory on Imitation in afootnote on lecture f i ve. l l He contends tha t poetry is certain-ly desc r i pti ve ra ther than imita t iv e "in t he execution of par-t icular pa r ts ,tt12 but admits that " the re is a qualif ied sensei n which poetry , in general may be cal l ed an imit a t i v e art" .13I t i s i n t he continuat ion of this f ootnot e which follows he rethat \re get our best id ea of the close re la t ionship betweenBl a i r and Ar i s t o t l e and i t brings rorth t o some degree the in -debtedness of the cent ury to Ar i s t o t l e for i t s theories of Imi-tat ion . "The sub jec t of the poe t ," says Bla i r , fol lowingAlexander Ger a rd , 14

    i s in tended t o be an imitation , not of t h ings rea l lyexis t ing, but of the cours e of nature; that i s , afeigned repre sent at ion of such events, or such scenes ,as though they never had a be i ng , yet might have existed;

    8 . Rhetoric, p. 569 . Ibid . , p . 5610. Ibid . , p . 5611 . Ibid . , p . 5712. Ibid . , p . 5713 . Ibid. , p . 5714 . Alexander Ger a rd , An Essay ,S@ 'l'ast e appendix

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    42/71

    39

    and Which, therefore, by the ir probabili ty, beara resemblance to nature.15Here the use of the t erm "nature " mus t be used as Ar i st ot l e i n-tended. 'l'o Ar i s t ot l e nature was not the outward wor ld of crea tedth ings, i t is the creat ive force. 16 "I t was pr obably i n thissense," says Bl a i r , "that Aristotle t ermed poet ry a mimetic ar t .How far ei ther the imitat ion or the desc r ip t i on wh i ch poetryemploys is superior t o t he imitative power of mu s i c and pa i ntingi s well shown by Mr . Har r i s , in his t reat ise on mu s i c , pa intingand poetry."l? Here Bl a i r poi nts out the advantages mentionedin this t rea t i se . 'lh e pai nter i s confined to one scene whereasthe writer may present a ser i es or continuity of act i on . t h epainter or sculpture can only dep ict objec ts as they appear tot he eye and can very imperf ect l y delineate character and senti-ments, which are t he noblest sUbjects of imitation and descrip -t ion. He summarizes the foot not e by observing that wri t i ng anddiscourse have a high super i or i ty above a l l other imitative arts .

    I t is evident tha t Bl ai r does not accept to t he fu l l -Aris tot le ' s t heory of Imit a t i on as Ger a r d had done. wasnot due to a l ack or knowledge of Aristo t le ' s theory becausei t seems r r had caught t he ful l meaning of Ar i s to t l e ' sconcept and Hlair was a l l t oo familiar with Ger ard ' s Essay .18Blair ' s reason r or not accept i ng Ar is to t le 's theory ent irely i s

    15. Rhe t o r i c , p. 5? footnote.16. VIm. Turner .QJ!. c it . , p , 144l? Rhetoric, p. 5? see f ootn o t e .18. A. Bosker , .QJ!. c i t . , p. 160

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    43/71

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    44/71

    GHAPTER VI

    BLAIR t S CONCEPT AND NOTION OF TASTE

    Blair 's theory t aste i s in t imately as sociated wit h hi sideas on beauty, sUb l imity and i mit at i on. Imitat ion was asource o pleasure to tas t e and tas te \v.a s the power o r ece iv ing p leasu re rrom the subl ime and b e a u t i ~ u l in nature and a rt .In a t tempting to explain the natur e o t as te he asks , "whetheri t i s to be considered as an i nte rnal sense or as an exact ionof reason,,? l

    He per ce i ves t aste t o be ' ul t imately ~ o u n d e d on a cer t a i nnatura l and ins t inct ive sensib i l i t y to beauty t , 2 neverthe lesshe insis ts that reason has much t o do in the ope rat ion of taste .1u i l lust ra te th is poi nt he observe s tha t ' the g re ater p art o the pr oduct i ons gen ius ar e no other than imitations o nature; representat ions of the characters , actions or mannersor men t ; 3 and t hough t he pleasure derived from such imitationsis ~ o u n d e d on t a s t e , i t i s t he wo rk of reason to judge whetheror not the objects pr e sent ed are b e u t i ~ u l by compar i ng th ecopy with the o r i g i nal .

    In the opera t ion of tas te , then , t wo di f ferent elementsseem to have a share; f i r s t a na tura l sus cept i b i l i t y or sensi -

    1 . Rhetoric, p . 16.2. Ibid . , p. 193 . Ibid. , p , 19

    41

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    45/71

    42

    tiveness to pleasurable emotions aris ing from the contemplationof beauty and sublimity; and, secondly, a sound judgment, t oenable th is faculty, with or without consciousness of such assistance, to appreciate what i s beautiful and sublime and admirei t intel l igently. To the exercise of th is f aculty, however , i ni t s perfection, a good heart i s no less essent ia l than a soundhead. Not only are the moral beaut i e s sup er i or to al l others ,but the i r in fluence i s exerted, i n a greater or l e s s degree, onmany objects of taste wi t h which t hey ar e connec t e d . 1he af-fections, Characters , and ac t ions of men , cer t a i nl y a f f ordgenius t he nob l e s t sub jects; and of t hese there can be no dueappreciation by cr i t i cs whose mi nd s ar e actuated by motives andprinciples which conf l i c t ,n t h t hose whi ch t hey respective lycontemplate or descr ibe. 'thus t he highest beauties of writingare necessari ly los t on the se l r ish and hard-hearted man . 4

    Havi ng bas ed t aste on a ' na t ura l and inst inct ive sensi -b i l i ty ' to the beauties of ar t and nature , he f i nd s t aste tobe common to a l l men . Even ch i l d r en, he notes, manifest t h i sin a fondness fo r r egular bodies , pictures and a love of what-ever i s new and marvel ous , and in t h e i r i mi t a t ions of al l kinds .In l ike mariner, the most i gnorant a re de l i gh t ed with bal ladsand ta les; the simples t ar e struck with the beauties of earthand sky; even savage s , by the i r ornament s , the i r songs , andthe i r rude eloquence, show t ha t al ong wi t h rea son and speechthey have received the facul "cy of appr ec ia t ing beauty . Blairconcludes, therefore, t hat t he pr inc ip les of tas t e are deeply

    4. Rhetoric, p. 20

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    46/71

    43

    and un iversa l ly implant ed i n t he mind s of men . 5lh ough t aste i s common t o all men, he goe s on t o show ,

    that , they by no means posse s s i t in the s ame degree . Thereare some who har dl y r eceive any sensible impress ions even fromthe mos t s t r iking ob jec t s ; ot hers are capable of appreciatingonly t he coarsest kind of beauties , while the remaining groupreceive pleasurable emot ions to the highest de gre e . Her e , hethinks, t here seems t o be a gr eat er differenoe between men asrespects tas te , than in poin t of common sense, reason or judgment .Nature, he believes, makes l i t t le di s t i not i on among men concerning ' th e d is tr ibu tion of t a lents ' which are necessary forman's well being; wherea s those that are concerned with the orna ment a l pa r t of l i fe ' she bes tows sparingly, and re quires a highercut t ur e I for bring ing them to perf'ection I . 6

    This d i f ference in the degrees of tas te possessed by menis owing in grea t measure , as we have seen , to nature; whichhas endowed some wi th more sensitive organs than others, andt hus made them capable of greater in te l lec tual enjoyment . rlut,in te res t ingly enough, Bla i r holds that eduoation has even moreto do 'n th the fo rmation of taste than nature; a fa ct which becomes Obvious when we campare bar barous with enlightened nationsin this respect , or contras t such indiv iduals o f the l a t t e r whohave paid attention t o l iber a l stud i es with the uncultivatedand vulgar. l f inds, t hen, that we a t once perceive ana ~ o s t inoredibl e di f fer ence in the degree of tas te which they

    5 . Rhetoric, pp . 16-176. Ib id . , pp . 17-18

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    47/71

    44

    respectively possess, a dirrerence at tr ibutable to nothing butthe education or the raculty in the one case and the neglectin the other.

    Hence i t follows that taste i s a very improvable faculty;and, he observes, in the case or th is , as well as a l l the mentaland bodily powers, exercise is to be .regarded as the great sourceof health and strength. He thinks that by frequent at tent ionto beautiful objects and approved models the cr i t ic will in duetime be able to point out the ' several excellencies and blemishes'of what he peruses. Hosker cal ls out at tent ion to a ratherinteresting point of view in this connection. He shows thatHlair conceived the cr i t ic ' s duty was to admire as well as toblame.

    I r reason .might prompt him to be on the look-outfor deviations from established principles, ' t as te 'wil l prevent him from paying too s t r ic t at tent ionto them. inis 'beauty-blemish' theory, as i t hasbeen called by Professor Sain tsbury , was often re-sorted to by the cr i t ics of Dryden's time and especially by the Augustans. Instead of judgingexclusively by faults , they had insisted on a mor eappreciative sort of crit icism which attempted tofind out the merits rather than the defects. Hlair ' sdefinit ion of taste as ' the power of receivingpleasure from the beauties of nature and of ar t 'proves that he shares th is view. 7rllair then recommends dil igent study and the close at tent ion

    to models of style as the correct means to t he ful l appreciationof the great works of l i te ra ture . For one s l ight ly acquaintedwith the productions of genius sees no more in them than incommonplace compositions; thei r merits are los t to him; he is

    7. ~ o s k e r , 2. c i t . , p. 160

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    48/71

    45

    equally blind to the ir excellencies and defects . Hi s tas te ,however, becomes cult ivated in pr opor t i on as hi s acquaintancewith works of this character is extended. He i s gr adua l l y en-abled to f orm judgments and to give sa t is f actory reasons f orthem. 8

    I t is interest ing to see that , even thOUgh Bl a i r cons i d e r stas te primarily a natural gi f t , t here mus t be a close r e a i o ship between taste and r eason. I f we judge cor r ec t l y fro m wha the has said, we may draw the conclusion tha t t he r a t i onal f acul-ty permits training and tas te , in so f a r a s i t envolves therat ional faculty would also be suscep tible to t ra in i n g . We arepleased th rough our natural sensib i l i t y to impress ions of thebeautiful , aided, as we shal l see, by the imaginati o n ; but anexertion of reason i s f i r s t re quired to in f"orm us whether or notthe objects presented are beautifu l . Hence he points out thatby the application of reason and good sense t o the pr oduct i onsof genius we have a considerable source of i mprovement of tas te .

    In reading such a poem as the Aneid , th erefore , Blai rf inds that much of our grat i f ica t ion ar is es f r om the way inwhich the story is conducted: having a pr oper connection be -tween i t s parts; from the f idel i ty of the charac te r s to na ture;the sp i r i t with \Vhich they are maintained; and t he appropri -ateness of t he style to the sentiments expressed. A poem thusconducted is enjoyed by the mind, through t he joint ope r a t i onof taste and the imagination; but the f ormer fa cu lty , without

    8. Rhetoric, p. 18

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    49/71

    46

    the guidance of re a son, could form no opinion of the s tory ,would be a t loss to know whet her i t was pr oper l y conduc t ed, andwould t herefore f a i l to r ec eive plea sure f rom i t . Hence 1spuri -ous beauties, such as unnatu ra l characters , for ced sentiments ,affected style, may please f or a l i t tle; but they please onlybecause the i r opposit ion to nature and to good sense has notbeen examined. Once show how na ture might have been mor e justlyimitated or represented; how the ~ i t e r might have managed hisSUbject wi t h gr eat er advantage; the i l l u s i o n \n l l pr e s e n t l y bediss ipated, and these false beauties wil l pl eas e no more . ,9

    Two things, then, are nec es sary to obtain a refined t aste .Fr equent exercise and t he appl i cat i on of r eason and good senseto t he objects of tas te wil l produce the re qui r ed resul t . 'Tast ein i t s peri'e ct s t a t e is the resu l t both of nature .and a r t . I tsupposes our nat ural sense of beauty to be re f i ned by f r equenta tte ntion to the mos t beaut i ful ob jects and a t the s ame t i me t obe guided and improved by t he light 0 1' unders tand ing . f lO

    When taste is brought to i t s highest degree of per f ect i onit is reduoible to t wo charac teris t i cs : del icacy wi th enablesthe cr i t i c to discover beaut i e s that l i e h i dden from the vulgareye, and correctness which ~ n l e the cr i t ic to t r ace theprinciples f r om which beaut ies der i ve t hei r power of pleas i ng .Delicacy ha s more to do vd th f eel ing ; correctness , more t o dowith reason and jUdgment. Of t he c r itics dis t inguished bydelioaoy Longinus is mentioned, of tho se possessing a high

    9. ' Rhe tor ic , p. 1910. Ib id . , p . 20

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    50/71

    47

    degree of correc tness, Ar i sto t l e and S\nft . These t vro quali -t i es , though quite dist inc t , to a certain extent imply eachother. No t aste can be 'exqui te ly del icate ' vdthout beingcorrect , or thoroughly correct wi thout being del i cate . Stillone or the other char acter is t ic predominates . l l

    Thus far Bl a i r has cons idered taste i n i t s sound andhealthy s tate . He propose s next t o obs erve how it is subjectto caprice, and wheth er or not in the midst of t hese changeswe may distingui sh a true f r om a fals e t a s t e. He cal ls ourat tent ion to the fact tha t many choose t o t hink of the f a cul t yof taste as something qui t e arb i t rary ; that i s is not groundedon invariable pr i nc ip l e s , is as cer tainab l e by no standard, andi s dependent exclusively on the changing f ancy of the hour;and tha t therefore, al l i nqui r i es concerning i t s operationsare useless.

    In view of such a these , he can readily see why itis natural to f a l l back on the proverb tha t , ' there is nodisputing about t as tes ' ; and to conc lude tha t , as long a s therei s so grea t a divers i ty, a l l s t andard s and te s t s must be arbi -t rary and consequently wor thless . But he immediately showsth e absurd ity of th is posit ion; f or he obs erves tha t i f th isprinciple is applied to t aste i n i t s f igurat ive sense, i t isequivalent to the genera l propos i t ion that , as regards theperceptions of sense, by whi ch some things appear agreeableand others disagreeab le , the re i s no such thing as good orbad, r ight or wrong; that every man ' s t as te i s to him a

    11. Rhetoric, pp . 20-21

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    51/71

    48

    s tandar d vdthout appeal and that we can not , therefore, proper -ly censure even thos e vmo prefer the very v ~ poe t s to 1

    Blai r concedes t hat tas tes admit of var ie ty; but only vmenexercised on dif f er ent th i n g s . I f men disagree on the samesubject, 'when one condemns a s ugly what anothe r admires asbeaut i ru l , ' then we no longe r have dive rs i ty of opinion he says ,but di rect oppos i t ion; and one must be r ight and the otherwrong, 'unles s we a llow the absurd posi t ion t ha t al l t a s tes a reequally good ' . Hence we need a s t andard of t as te to poi nt outwhy one is wrong and t he other i s r i ght . 13Bl a i r sets out to inquire wha t this s tanda rd i s , t o vmich,in such opposition of t as te s , ,re may have r ecourse . e observe sthat t he term impl i es s ome t h i n g es tab l i s hed as a rule or modelof such undoubted authori t y a s to be the t e s t or other thingsof the s ame kind . 'lhus when we say a s t andard weight or mea sure ,we mean one appointed by law t o r egula te a l l other we igh t s andmeasures.

    In a t t emp t i ng to establ ish th is s tandard of t a ste , hewould have us observe t ha t whenever an imitation of any nat uralobject is a imed a t , as f or i nstance, when a desc r ip t i on of alandscape or a po r t r a i t ure of human character is a t t empted ,f ide l i ty to nature is t he pr oper cr i t erion of the t ru ly beaut i -r ul , and we may l ay down the proposit ion t ha t na t ure is ourstandard. I n such cas es, rea son can readily compare the copywith t he origina l; and approve or condemn , a s i t f i nd s th e

    12 . Rhetoric, pp . 21 -2213 . Ib id . , p . 23

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    52/71

    49

    pecul iar i t ies or the ob j ec t imitated mor e or less t ru thf u llyrepresented.14

    However , he f i nds t hat t hi s standard i s not app li cable inmany cases and therefore seeks s ome t h i ng, - tha t can be rende redmore clear and pr e c i s e t o be t he s tandard of t as te . 1I 15 Thissearch would end abruptly wer e he t o f ind any per son posse ssedof a l l the men ta l power s in fu l l perfect ion , of senses alwaysexquisite and t rue, and par t i cul ar ly of sound and unerringjudgment; for his opinions in matte r s or taste would beyonddoubt consti tute an unexceptionable s t andard for al l others .But he is aware of t he fact t hat as l ong as human natur e i sliable to imperfeot ions and er r or , t here can be no such l ivingcr i ter ion. Vfu er e , t hen, he a sks , can we find t he r equiredstandard? He answer s in the concurrent tas tes of the majorityof mankind. Wha t most men agre e in admiring , therefore, mustbe considered beaut i fu l; and his tas te alone can be esteemedtrue whi ch coi nc id es with the general sentiments of men. 16

    Vlien Bl ai r speaks of the concurrent tas tes of men as theuniversal standar d, it should be understood that he means thetas tes of men placed i n s i tuations favorable to the proper de -velopment of this f a oul t y . Suoh loo se notions as may be enter-tained during ages of i gnorance and darkness , or among rudeand uncivilized nation s, oarry with them no authority . Bythe common sentiments men t here f ore, he means the oonourrent

    14. Rhetoric, p. 2415 . Ib id . , p . 2316. Ibid . , p. 24

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    53/71

    50

    opinions "of refined men in civil ized nations, by whom the artsare cultivated, works of genius are freely discussed and tasteis improved by science and philosophy".l?We conclude then, from t i lair 's notion of ta s te tha t it i s

    by no means an arbi t rary principle, sub ject to the whim of eachindividual , and which admits of no cri ter ion f or determiningwhether it be t rue or false.

    I t s foundation is the same in a l l human minds. I tis bu ilt upon sentiment and perceptions which be-long to our nature; and which, in gener al , operatewith the same uniformity as out in te l lectual princi-ples . When these sentiments are perverted by igno-rance and prejudice, they are capable or being rect i -fied by reason. Their sound and natura l s ta te isultimately determined, by compari ng them with thegeneral tas te of mankind. I n ever y compos i t i on ,therefore, what in teres ts the imagi nation , andtouches the heart , pleases a l l ages and a l l na t i o n s .18

    l? Rhetoric, p. 2518. Ibid . , p . 26

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    54/71

    CHAPTER VI IAPPLICATIONS OF BLAIR'S NOTI ONS ro PARTICULARLITERARY FORMS

    Having treated the general matters and theory of Bl a i r ' swork i t remains for us to now turn to a consideration of theapplication Blair makes of t hes e concepts to pa r t i cula r l i t e r -ary forms. I have chosen to deal with oratory, the epic , t rage-dy, comedy and lyr ic poetry because t l la ir is par t i cula r l y in te r -ested in these types or rorms or l i t e rary compos i t ion.

    Oratory was used by t l la ir in a ra ther general s ense whichcovers 'eloquence' in al l i t s forms. 'rhis is evident fID m h i sdefini t ion of eloquence. I t was " the a r t of' speaking in sucha malliler as to at ta in the end for which we speak" . l In a l argesense he views i t as "the ar t of persuas ion,,2 which brings for ththe rhetorical tone of his notion of elo quence .

    I t i s in teres t ing to note the d i s t inct ion he makes betweenconvincing and per suadi ng because i t i l lus t ra t es defini te ly theimportance he places on the pas s ions i n e loquence . "Convict ion ,"he poin ts put, "aff 'ects the und erstanding only, persuasion theval l and pract ice . I t i s the bus i ne s s of the ph i lo sopher toconvince me of t ru th; i t is t he bus iness of t he orator t o per -suade me to act agreeably to i t , by engaging my af'fections on

    1. Rhetoric , p . 2612. Ib id . , p . 262

    51

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    55/71

    52i t s side .,,3 In order to persuade, t h e r e f o r e , the ora tor must"address himself t o the pa s s i ons , point t o the fancy and t ouchthe heart" .4

    High eloquence then must appeal to the pass i o n s . "I t i s ,"says Blair , li t he offspring of passion. ,,5 By pas s i on he meantthat s t ate of mind in wh i ch i t i s ag ita t ed and fired by someobject i t has in view. "A man may conv ince and even per suadeothers to act , by mere reason and argument . But that degree ofeloquence which gains the admiration of mankind and properlydenominates one an orator, i s never f'ound without warmt h andpassion .,,6 This is the appl icat ion of .bla i r ' s sublime to eloquence. The true sublime, a s he has mentioned , a rou s es s t rongemotions and pr oduces wha t he ca l l s a sort of internal el evation .

    Like taste eloquence requi r es both natural genius and muchimprovement from ar t . 7 To be a good ora t or one must possessthe quali t ies of a good cr i t ic , a sound jUdgment , a good heartand he mus t understand the affec t i ons, characters and actionsof men. As the highest qua l i t i es of good writing are necessa -r i ly los t on t he sel f ish and hard -hearted man, so too , he be -l ieves, the orator must possess t he mora l qua l i t i es wh i ch willenable him to select whatever persuade man t o act accordingto his nature. in essence i s demanding in t he orator \vhat

    3. Rhetoric, p. 2624. Ibid. , p. 2625 . Ibid . , p . 2636 . Ibid. , p. 2647 . Ibid. , p . 264

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    56/71

    53

    Blair has called the moral sublimity.uonsidering the pa t h e t i c part of the discourse Bl ai r be-

    l ieves, i f h i s anywhere tha t eloquence reigns and exertsi t s power, it i s in the pat he t ic . He contends that we shouldnot do a s the ancients i n cr e a t ing and i nve s t iga ting t he natureof each pas s i on . 'rb i s , he th i nks wil l not help us because weare indebted to nature and to "a cer ta in s t rong and happy senst-bi l i ty of mind,,8 for t he proper functioning of our emot ions .

    We must consider whether the sUb j ec t admi t s of t he pa thet i c.1 ~ i s too is the case with sUb l imi t y. Both must exis t i n t hesUbject . He maintains t ha t " t o every emotion or passion , natur-ehas adapted a set of ' co r r e s pond i ng Objects , and without se t t ingthese before t he mind , i t is not in the power of an orato r toraise that emotion". 9 He poi nts out tha t i f one speaks in theabstract he may t ouch the audience by appealing only to the i rreason or consc ience. However , when he describes "the tender -ness and ki ndnes s of my f r iend; he must set before me the dis-t ress suffered by the pers on fo r whom he would in teres t me, thenand not t i l l then, my hear t begins to be touched , my grati tudeor my compassion begins t o ~ , "Every passion ," he says ,

    'f ," is most strongly exoited by sensation; as anger , by the feelingof an injury, or t he pre sence of the injurer . Next t o the inf lu ence of sense i s memory and next to memory is imagination . " l l

    8. Rhetoric, p . 2649 . Ib i d . , p. 360

    10. I b i d . , p. 36011. Ib id . , p. 360

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    57/71

    541his whole t reatment is very s imi l a r to Hla i r ' s discussion ofat ta ining t he sub lime i n writing and the ways in which beautifUland sUbl ime ob jects affec t the senses and i magi na t i on. 12

    Aga in as with sub l imity, the emot ions of the speaker mus tbe aroused i f he wishes to move hi s hearers . "The inte r nalemot ion or t he speaker adds a pathos to hi s word s , hi s looks ,his ges t ures and his whol e manne r , which exerts a power almos ti r resis t ib le over tho se who hear him .,,13 All fo r ced a t temptsa t becoming pat he t i c when we are not moved oursel ves l eave usopen to r idicule .Simi l a r l y as wit h subl imi t y i t is neces sary t o use t heproper language of t he pa s s i on s or we sha l l produce the s ameresul t as is pr oduced when we l abor f or sUbl imity with a badchoice of word s . We get eithe r f r ig i d i ty or bombast . I f weobserve t he language of one "who is under t he power of r eal orstrong pass ion; we sha l l always find his language unaffectedand simple. I t may be animated , indeed , vd th bol d and strongfigures, but i t wil l have no ornamen t or f i nery . lI l4

    Bla ir warns never to attempt pr ol ong ing t he pathetic ."Warm emotions are too vio lent to be la s t i ng . lI l 5 He sugge s tshere as he has done so many t imes i n t r eat ing t he sub lime thatwe cannot sustain a strong passionate tone and that we must be

    12. Rhetoric, pp. 44-4513. Ib id . , p. 36014. I b i d . , p. 36115. Ib id . , p . 361

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    58/71

    55careful in making the t ransi t ion from strong emotions to thecalmer strain of the beautiful .

    We find a s t r iking application of what Blai r cal ls t hemoral sublimity in th is passage where he suggests t he necessar,rrequirements of t ru ly great orators .

    The sentiments and d i s p o s i ~ i o n pa r t i cula r l y requi-s i te ror t hem to cu ltiv ate are t he r ol l owing: loveof justice and order, and indigna t ion a t insolenceand oppression; the love of hones t y and t ru th , anddetestat ion of fraud, meannes s and corruption; magna-nimity of spi r i t ; the l ove or liberty, of t h e i rcountry, and the public; zeal f or a l l grea t and nobledesigns, and reverence for a l l worthy and he r o i ccharacters.16Regarding imitation, Bl a i r says, " this hi gh power wh i c h

    eloquence and poetry possess, of supplying t a ste and the imagi-nation with such a wi de circle o f p le asu re s, they derive fromthe ir having a greater capacity of imita t i on and de scr ipt ionthan is possessed by any other art. , ,17 We mus t be ca r e f ul ,however, to imitate only t he bes t f or "even i n the most f in ishedmodels we can select , it mus t not be fo r gotten, that there arealways some things improper f or imitation" .18 Following theideas developed on imitation he caut ions aga i nst a to o se rv i l eimitation . "One ought never to attach himself' too cl ose ly toany single model .,,19 Let the orato r se lec t f'r om sever a l thebest i deas of each .

    'lile two highest kinds of poetical wri t ing for l are16. Rhetoric, p . 38017 . Ibid . , p. 5618. Ibid . , p . 38219 . Ibid . , p . 382

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    59/71

    56

    the epic and the dramatic. The epic is the most dignified ofpoetic works. Bl a i r conceives the epic "to be the reci t a l ofsome i l lustr ious enterprise in a poe t i cal f orm" .20 This i s asomewhat general definit ion but t ypica l of vmat Bla i r ha s donewith beauty, sublimity, t aste and imitat ion. He contend s that" i t is absurd to at tempt defining and l imit ing wher e naturehas fixed no standard but leaves scope for beaut i e s of manydifferent kinds".2l

    Bl a i r is consistent wi t h his idea on imita t ion being atrue copy of some original found in nature when he s tates t hework of the epic poet.

    As i t is the business of an epic poe t to copy af t ernature and to form a pr obabl e and i nte r e s t i n g t a l e ,he must study to give a l l his personages proper andwell-supported characters, such as di splay thefeatures 'of human nature. I t i s b y no means ne ces -sary, that a l l his actors be mora l ly good; imperfec t ,nay, vicious characters , may find a proper place ;though the nature of epic poetry seems to r equire ,that the principal figures exhibi t ed should be suchas tend to raise admirat ion and l ove , r a the r thanhatred or contemp t. 221he second part of th is quot at i on f ol l ows Bla i r ' s thought tha timitation need not be only of good ac t s or charac t ers . The railtes t rests in the similari ty between the copy and the original .

    Tragedy unlike epic poetry introduce s rea l characters whoare speaking and a c t i n g ~ In th is respect i t af f or ds a direc timitation of human manners and actions. ~ h i s t he substance

    20. Hhetoric, p. '47221. Ibid. , p. 47222. Ibid. , p . 478

  • 8/8/2019 1943 Babel Blair%27s 3

    60/71

    5?of which tlla i r fashi ons his i dea of true imitation . Hence "nokind of wri t ing has so much power , when happily executeq toraise t he s t ronge s t ec ot ions . I t is , or 0 ht to be , a mir rorin which we beh old ourselves and the ev il s to ich we are ex-posed; a f ai thful copy of human ass i ons" . 23

    Tragedy d if fers f r om comedy in that i t is concer ned vd t hthe gr ave and ser ious . I t i s a mor e d ignified ent e r ta inmentt


Sharp 37gt-27s _ Chassis - Squad-t

Sharp 37gt-27s _ Chassis - Squad-t

Lecture 41 - Cook%27s Theorem

Lecture 41 - Cook%27s Theorem

S-09 Children 27s Clothes

S-09 Children 27s Clothes

Bindiya%27s Project[1]

Bindiya%27s Project[1]

Hershey%27s Report

Hershey%27s Report

MASTER’S THESIS LET masters’ programme 35 cr, 413008S Pirkko Hyvönen pirkko.hyvonen@oulu.fi Home: 27s+Thesis 27s+Thesis.

MASTER’S THESIS LET masters’ programme 35 cr, 413008S Pirkko Hyvönen [email protected] Home: 27s+Thesis 27s+Thesis.

Emily Bronte%27s Wuthering Heights %28Bloom%27s Guides%29

Emily Bronte%27s Wuthering Heights %28Bloom%27s Guides%29

RudrumCavell%27s Beckett Final Draft

RudrumCavell%27s Beckett Final Draft

Hildegard 27s Healing Plants

Hildegard 27s Healing Plants

Ci prog 300_remote_%20_user%27s%20munual

Ci prog 300_remote_%20_user%27s%20munual

Dori%27s Letter of Recommendation

Dori%27s Letter of Recommendation

Hume%27s Belief

Hume%27s Belief

Sahil%27s Grammar Notes

Sahil%27s Grammar Notes

PEC%27s Schedules

PEC%27s Schedules

Felcom 50 Operator%27s Manual

Felcom 50 Operator%27s Manual

Isaac Babel (1894 – 1940) - Stanford Universityweb.stanford.edu/~gfreidin/Publications/babel/Babel... · 2015-08-15 · Gregory Freidin Isaac Babel 1887 reported in the emigre press,

Isaac Babel (1894 – 1940) - Stanford Universityweb.stanford.edu/~gfreidin/Publications/babel/Babel... · 2015-08-15 · Gregory Freidin Isaac Babel 1887 reported in the emigre press,

Geometer%27s Sketchpad Fractals Presentation

Geometer%27s Sketchpad Fractals Presentation

Charlie Brown 27s Greatest Hits

Charlie Brown 27s Greatest Hits

Negative Impact Of Mnc%27s

Negative Impact Of Mnc%27s

1985 Shanghai Women%27s Clothing

1985 Shanghai Women%27s Clothing