And we are thus left to consider the
style, or mode of expression.
Style is not stationary, or, _in the concrete_, matter of principle:
style is, firstly, national; next, chronological; and lastly,
individual. To try the oriental system by the European, and pronounce
either wrong by so much as it exceeds or falls short, would imply so
entire a want of comprehensive appreciation as can scarcely fail to
induce the conviction, that the two are distinct and independent,
each to be tested on its own merits. Again, were the Elizabethan
dramatists right, or are those of our own day? Neither absolutely, as
by comparison alone; his period speaks in each; and each must be
judged by this: not whether he is true to any given type, but whether
his own type be a true one for himself. And this, which holds good
between nations and ages, holds good also between individuals. Very
different from Shelley's are Wordsworth's nature in description, his
sentiment, his love; Burn's and Keats's different from these and from
each other: yet are all these, nature, and sentiment, and love.
But here it will be urged: by this process any and every style is
pronounced good, so that it but find a measure of recognition in its
own age and country; nay, even the author's self-approval will be
sufficient. And, as a corollary, each age must and ought to reject
its predecessor; and Voltaire was no less than right in dubbing
Shakspere barbarian.
Pages:
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352