Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

"Forty years ago (or in all probability a good deal more, for we have already completed thirty-seven years from Waterloo, and my remembrance upon this subject goes back to a period lying much behind that great era) I used to be annoyed and irritated by the false interpretation given to the Greek word aiúv (æon).”

Here the parenthesis is of undue length, for out of fifty-five words it comprises thirty-four; and besides, while the sentence refers to false interpretations of the Greek word, the parenthesis takes away the attention of the reader to the totally different subject of the era of Waterloo.

In the following example from Bolingbroke the same fault may be seen:

"It seems to me that in order to maintain the system of the world at a certain point far below that of ideal perfection (for we are made capable of conceiving what we are incapable of attaining), but, however, sufficient upon the whole to constitute a state easy and happy (or at the worst, tolerable); I say, it seems to me that the Author of nature has seen fit to mingle among the societies of men a few, and but a few, of those on whom he is graciously pleased to bestow a larger portion of the ethereal spirit than is given in the ordinary course of his government to the sons of men."

This passage exhibits many faults, such as useless repetitions, tedious circumlocution, and general awkwardness of construction; but the thing to be noticed here is the use of the parenthesis without any sufficient cause, and its occurrence twice in the same sentence.

The following is an extract from a translation of Rotteck's Universal History:

“Only what was decreed or approved by such assemblies (of the people themselves in so far as it was possible, or at least of the great who represented them in some measure) was regarded as law."

Here the parenthesis is of disproportionate length, since it comprises twenty-three words out of thirty-six..

§ 56. UNITY IN LONG AND SHORT SENTENCES.

From the foregoing illustrations it is evident that unity does not depend upon mere length, since it may be as well observed in the periodic as in the simple structure. The long sentence has its own beauties and its own advantages; but it requires more careful handling and a higher degree of elaboration in order to be effective. Violations of unity are no doubt chiefly

visible in long sentences, but these arise not so much from their length as from the carelessness of the writer. Lord Clarendon, amid many excellences which have made his history a classical work, exhibits this one great blemish; for his careless constructions lead to more frequent offences against unity than can be found in any other writer of equal merit. His habit often is to begin a statement, and then append clause after clause, joining each by any connective that may come to hand, without any thought of proper subordination; and when at length the sentence comes to an end, its close does not appear to depend upon any purpose of the writer, but seems rather to come by chance.

Where unity is thus affected the remedy is generally easy. Either the sentence itself may be reconstructed, or, if this cannot be done, it may be broken up into two or more new ones, each of which will be complete in itself.

CHAPTER VI.

PERSPICUITY IN GENERAL.

$ 57. PERSPICUITY IN GENERAL. CLEARNESS OF CONCEPTION

AND METHOD.

We have now to consider the subject of perspicuity in general.

The chief requisite here is clearness of conception on the part of the writer. It is evident that one who has distinct ideas of his subject will be best able to impart such ideas to others; and, on the other hand, it may be said that without this it is impossible to attain to perspicuity. No writer can give to others that which he himself does not possess. Of obscure passages, some are without any definite meaning; others lead to a conclusion which is not what is to be expected from the context; others again are susceptible of a meaning which was never in the mind of the writer; and in such cases the fault will generally be found to arise from the lack of clear conceptions on the part of the author.

But even where the writer has the clearest possible conception of his subject, it by no means follows that his style will be perspicuous. The art of expression must be studied as well; and where this is neglected the most complete and acknowledged mastery of the subject will not prevent obscurity.

In addition to this, the argument must be presented in a distinct and intelligible manner. However clear the ideas may be, and however lucid the individual sentences, unless the arrangement of the whole be perspicuous, the general impression left upon the mind will after all be but vague and obscure. Hence the order of thought must be attended to, as well as the art of expression.

A conspicuous example of one whose method is inferior to his power of expression may be found in De Quincey. No English prose writer surpasses him in command over words, or in the construction of sentences; but he seems incapable of arranging his thoughts in the most effective manner. His succession of ideas is often quite inconsequential; he inserts unexpectedly new suggestions which distract the attention; he is discursive, irregular, unmethodical; and at the close of his essay the reader finds that he has been engaged in a delightful survey of several pleasing themes, among which the formal subject is far from being the most prominent.

Nowhere is this so strikingly visible as in the difference before alluded to between French and German writers. The latter, who in many cases are the acknowledged leaders in science and philosophy, are notoriously obscure in the expression of their ideas, and confused in the arrangement of them; while the former, who are most precise in the expression of their thoughts, are no less clear and luminous in their method.

In connection with perspicuity in general various qualities of style present themselves for consideration, and these have both their beauties and defects, which will be noticed in order.

§ 58. CONCISENESS, OR BREVITY..

66

Conciseness means the employment of no more words than are absolutely necessary. When not carried too far it may be quite consistent with perspicuity. 'Brevity is the soul of wit," and great and important truths are often summed up in a short but pithy statement. The most familiar examples of this are

found in proverbs, maxims, and current sayings, which are usually as clear as they are brief. Certain writers are fond of this mode of expression; and as it is frequently very effective when associated with the figure antithesis, so those writers who are most concise will generally be found employing an antithetical style. Tacitus, Lord Bacon, and Emerson are striking examples of this.

The following sentences exhibit this quality:

"Content may dwell in all stations. To be low, but above contempt, may be high enough to be happy. But many of low degree may be higher than computed, and some cubits above the common commensuration; for in all states, virtue gives qualifications and allowances which make out defects. Rough diamonds are sometimes mistaken for pebbles; and meanness may be rich in accomplishments which riches in vain desire."-SIR THOMAS BROWNE.

In this passage we find no more words employed than are absolutely necessary. The style is compact and energetic, yet quite clear; and if the reader feels himself constrained to pause over the perusal of these sentences, it is not on account of their obscurity, but rather from the perception of a suggested meaning underlying that which is at first apparent.

Sometimes the meaning is not at once evident, and patient attention is required in order to arrive at it. This may be seen in the following sentences from Emerson :

"Literature is a point outside of our hodiernal circle through which a new one may be described."

"Our moods do not believe in each other."

"Men walk as prophecies of the next age."

Sometimes the thought is not stated at sufficient length. Conciseness is a virtue in style when the words are sufficient; but when they are too few, then obscurity is the result. Concise writers, as may be expected, while seeking to express themselves with but few words, often limit them to too small a number; and for this reason are understood with difficulty. Hence those who are distinguished for this quality abound in obscure passages. This arises, first, from an excessive paucity of words; secondly, from elliptical forms of expression; and, thirdly, from not dwelling sufficiently upon the thought that has been expressed.

Emerson's style is concise; it is often clear, but it is often obscure. For example:

“Every man is an inlet to the same and all of the same."

"Moons are no more bounds to spiritual power than bat-balls."

There is a meaning in these sentences which is of sufficient value to reward the effort to acquire it, yet to the ordinary reader they are obscure.

Conciseness is often conducive to perspicuity where a synopsis is needed of some previous statement. Here, by refreshing the memory, it helps to clear up obscurities; but at the same time such a repetition must necessarily be brief.

Conciseness does not furnish the best means for rhetorical excellence, though there are many concise writers who are by no means deficient in fondness for the beauties of style. In Bacon, Sir Thomas Browne, and Emerson may be found great epigrammatic point and brilliancy. Yet for all other qualities of style, for everything like richness and splendor of imagery, profusion of illustration, amplitude of statement, and magnificence and variety of diction, conciseness does not afford sufficient space.

$ 59. DIFFUSENESS.

Diffuseness means the employment of a liberal number of words for the expression of our ideas. Where it is held in check by a cultivated taste it may be called affluence of expression, and it is a characteristic of many of the greatest authors. Those who are fond of the beauties of style, and regard rhetoric as a fine art, are generally diffuse; they take delight in the rhythms and cadences of periods, and in all modes of embellishment; and seek to express their thoughts not only with clearness, but also with an attractive beauty. When to affluence of expression is also added precision, the highest perspicuity is the result. As examples of this, it will be sufficient to mention a few of the best-known names among ancient and modern authors, such as Xenophon, Livy, Clarendon, Macaulay. When these are compared with concise writers-Xenophon with Thucydides, Livy with Tacitus, Macaulay with Hallam— the truth of this statement will be manifest.

Those writers who are most highly rhetorical are most distinguished for this affluence of style. Among the ancients.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »