pictures of Alexander's history will stand this test, is submitted to judges. From these general observations, I proceed to particulars. In works exposed continually to public view, variety ought to be studied. It is a rule accordingly in sculpture, to contrast the different limbs of a statue, in order to give it all the variety possible. Though the cone, in a single view, be more beautiful than the pyramid; yet a pyramidal steeple, because of its variety, is justly preferred. For the same reason, the oval is preferred before the circle; and painters, in copying buildings or any regular work, give an air of variety, by representing the subject in an angular view: we are pleased with the variety, without losing sight of the regularity. In a landscape representing animals, those especially of the same kind, contrast ought to prevail: to draw one sleeping, another awake; one sitting, another in motion; one moving toward the spectator, another from him, is the life of such a performance. In every sort of writing intended for amusement, variety is necessary in proportion to the length of the work. Want of variety is sensibly felt in Davila's history of the civil wars of France; the events are indeed important and various; but the reader languishes by a tiresome monotony of character, every person engaged being figured a consummate politician, governed by interest only. It is hard to say, whether Ŏvid disgusts more by too great variety, or too great uniformity; his stories are all of the same kind, concluding invariably with the transformation of one being into another; and so far he is tiresome by excess in uniformity he is not less fatiguing by excess in variety, hurrying his reader incessantly from story to story. Ariosto is still more fatiguing than Ovid, by exceeding the just bounds of variety: not satisfied, like Ovid, with a succession in his stories, he distracts the reader, by jumbling together a multitude of them without any connexion. Nor is the Orlando Furioso less tiresome by its uniformity than the Metamorphoses, though in a different manner: after a story is brought to a crisis, the reader, intent on the catastrophe, is suddenlysnatched away to a new story, which makes no impression so long as the mind is occupied with the former. This tantalizing method, besides its uniformity, prevents that sympathy which is raised by an interesting event when the reader meets with no interruption. REVIEW. Describe the train of our perceptions. May it be modified at will? What causes accelerate or retard it? How are its effects apparent at different ages? On what else does the rate of succession depend? How may the power over our train of perceptions be strengthened? Give examples. What is the rule respecting uniformity and variety in painting? What respecting natural objects and descriptions? Which admits of the greater variety of ornament, a picture or a poem? What is the rule with respect to works exposed continually to public view? Give examples. What should prevail in a landscape? Give examples. In writing intended for amusement? Give examples. What is observed of Ovid and Ariosto? CHAPTER X. Congruity and Propriety. MAN is superior to the brute, not more by his rational faculties, than by his senses. With respect to external senses, brutes probably yield not to men; and they may also have some obscure perception of beauty; but the more delicate senses of regularity, order, uniformity, and congruity, being connected with morality and religion, are reserved to dignify the chief of the terrestrial creation. Upon that account, no discipline is more suitable to man, nor more congruous to the dignity of his nature, than that which refines his taste, and leads him to distinguish, in every subject, what is regular, what is orderly, what is suitable, and what is fit and proper. It is clear, from the very conception of the terms congruity and propriety, that they are not applicable to any single object; they imply a plurality, and signify a particular relation between different objects; and the perception we have of this relation, proceeds from a sense of congruity or propriety; that congruity or propriety, wherever perceived, is agreeable; and incongruity or impropriety, disagreeable. The only difficulty is, to ascertain what are the particular objects that suggest these relations; for there are many objects that do not: the sea, viewed in conjunction with a picture, or a man in conjunction with a mountain, suggest not either congruity or incongruity. We never perceive congruity nor incongruity, but among things connected by some relation; as a man and his actions, a principal and its accessories, a subject and its ornaments. We are indeed so framed by nature, among things so connected, to require a certain suitableness or correspondence termed congruity or propriety; and to be displeased when we find the opposite relation of incongruity or impropriety. The degree of congruity is proportioned to the connexion in things connected, as in behavior and manner of living; the relation between an edifice and the ground it stands on: the congruity among members of a club ought to be as obvious as among things placed for show in the same niche. Congruity is so nearly allied to beauty, as commonly to be held a species of it; and yet they differ so essentially, as never to coincide: beauty, like color, is placed upon a single subject; congruity upon a plurality: further, a thing beautiful in itself, may, with relation to other things, produce the strongest sense of incongruity. Congruity and propriety are commonly reckoned synonymous terms; and hitherto, in opening the subject, they have been used indifferently: but they are distinguishable; and the precise meaning of each must be ascertained. Congruity is the genus, of which propriety is a species; for we call nothing propriety, but that congruity or suitableness which ought to subsist between sensible beings and their thoughts, words, and actions. The relation of a part to the whole, being extremely intimate, demands the utmost degree of congruity. even the slightest deviation is disgustful. Examples of congruity and incongruity are furnished. in plenty by the relation between a subject and its ornaments. Å literary performance intended merely for amusement, is susceptible of much ornament, as well as a music-room or a play-house; for in gaiety the mind has a peculiar relish for show and decoration. Gorgeous apparel is not unsuitable among opera actors; grave subjects need little ornament, and a person of mean appearance in such dress, is a complete incongruity. Sweetness of look and manner require simplicity of dress: For loveliness Needs not the foreign aid of ornament, Congruity regulates both the quantity and the kind of ornament; the decorations for a dancing-room must be gay; for a church, grave; for a shield, warlike; though the shield of Achilles has in general the arts of peace, joy, and festivity. Nothing is more intimately related to a man than his sentiments, words, and actions; and therefore we require here the strictest conformity. When we find what we thus require, we have a lively sense of propriety; when we find the contrary, our sense of impropriety is no less lively. Hence the universal dis taste of affectation, which consists in making a show of greater delicacy and refinement, than is suited either to the character or circumstances of the person. A gross impropriety is punished with contempt and indignation, which are vented against the offender by external expressions; nor is even the slightest impropriety suffered to pass without some degree of contempt. But there are improprieties of the slighter kind, that provoke laughter; of which we have examples without end in the blunders and absurdities of our own species: such improprieties receive a different punishment, as will appear by what follows. The emotions of contempt and of laughter, occasioned by an impropriety of that kind, uniting intimately in the mind of the spectator, are expressed externally by a peculiar sort of laugh, termed a laugh of derision, or scorn. An impropriety that thus moves not only contempt, but laughter, is distinguished by the epithet of ridiculous; and a laugh of derision or scorn is the punishment provided for it by nature. Nor ought it to escape observation, that we are so fond of inflicting that punishment, as sometimes to exert it even against creatures of an inferior species; witness a turkey, swelling with pride, and strutting with displayed feathers, which in a gay mood is apt to provoke a laugh of derision. The sense of impropriety with respect to mistakes, blunders, and absurdities, is calculated for the good of mankind. In the spectators it is produc tive of mirth and laughter, excellent recreation in an interval from business. But this is a trifle compared with what follows. It is painful to be the subject of ridicule; and to punish with ridicule the man who is guilty of an absurdity, tends to put him more on his guard in time to come. It is well ordered, that even the most innocent blunder is not committed with impunity; because, were errors licensed where they do no hurt, inattention would grow into habit, and be the occasion of much hurt. |