Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

age, might recommend them to the prefent, And fince the life of shepherds was attended with more tranquillity than any other rural employment, the poets chose to introduce their perfons, from whom it receiv'd the name of Pastoral.

A Paftoral is an imitation of the action of a shepherd, or one confidered under that character. The form of this imitation is dramatic, or narrative, or mixed of both; the fable fimple; the manners nor too polite nor too ruftic; the thoughts are plain, yet admit a little quicknefs and paffion, but that short and flowing; the expreffion humble, yet as pure as the language will afford; neat, but not florid; eafy, and yet lively. In short, the fable, manners, thoughts and expreffions, are full of the grea teft fimplicity in nature.

The complete character of this Poem confifts in fimplicity, brevity, and delicacy; the two first of which render an eclogue natural, and the last delightful.

age.

If we would copy nature, it may be useful to take this confideration along with us, that Paftoral is an image of what they call the golden So that we are not to defcribe ours shepherds as shepherds at this day really are, but as they may be conceived then to have been, when the best of men followed this employment. To carry this refemblance yet farther, it would not be amifs to give thefe shepherds fome skill in

Aftronomy, as far as may be useful to that fort of life; and an air of piety to the Gods should shine through the Poem, which fo vifibly appears in all the works of antiquity; and it ought to preferve fome relish of the old way of writing; the connections should be loofe, the narrations and defcriptions short, and the periods concife. Yet it is not fufficient that the fentences only be brief, the whole eclogue should be fo too. For we cannot fuppofe Poetry to have been the bufinefs of the ancient shepherds, but their recreation at vacant hours.

But with a respect to the prefent age, nothing more conduces to make these compofures natutal, than when fome knowledge in rural affairs is difcovered. This may be made rather to appear done by chance than on defign, and sometimes is beft shewn by inference; left by too much study to feem natural,we deftroy that easy fimplicity from which arifes the delight. For what is inviting in this fort of Poetry proceeds not fo much from the idea of a country life itself, as from that of its tranquillity. We muft therefore ufe fome illufion to render a Paftoral delightful, and this confifts in expofing the beft fide only of a shepherd's life, and in concealing its miferies. Nor is it enough to intro-, duce shepherds difcourfing together, in a natu ral way; but a regard must be had to the fubject; that it contain fome particular beauty in itself, an that it be different in every eclogue. Besides,

in each of them a defigned fcene or profpect is to be prefented to our view, which should likewise have its variety. This variety is obtained in a great degree by frequent comparisons drawn from the most agreable objects of the country; by interrogations to things inanimate; by beautiful digreffions, but thofe short; fometimes by infifting a little on circumstances; and laftly, by elegant turns on the words, which render the numbers extremely fweet and pleafing. As for the numbers themselves, though they are properly of the heroic measure, they should be the fmootheft, the most easy and flowing imaginable.

It is by rules like thefe that we ought to judge of Paftoral; and fince the inftructions given for any art are to be delivered as that art is in perfection, they muft of neceffity be derived from those in whom it is acknowledged fo to be.'Tis therefore from the practice of Theocritus and Virgil (the only undisputed Authors of Paftoral) that the Critics have drawn the foregoing notions concerning it.

Theocritus excells all others in nature and fimplicity. The fubjects of his Idyllia are purely Paftoral; but he is not fo exact in his perfons, having introduced reapers and fishermen as well as shepherds. He is apt to be too long in his defcriptions, of which that of the cup in the first Paftoral is a remarkable inftance. In the manners he seems a little defective, for his

fwains are fometimes abufive and immodeft, and perhaps too much inclining to rufticity, for inftance, in his fourth and fifth Idyllia. But 'tis enough that all others learned their excellencies from him, and that his dialect alone has a fecret charm in it, which no other could ever attain.

Virgil, who copies Theocritus, refines upon his original;and in all points where judgment has the principal part, he is much fuperior to his maf ter. Though fome of his fubjects are not Pastoral in themselves, but only feem to be fuch; they have a wonderful variety in them, which the Greek was a ftranger to. He exceeds him in regularity and brevity, and falls short of him in nothing but fimplicity and propriety of ftyle; the firft of which perhaps was the fault of his age, and the last of his language.

Among the Moderns, their success has been greatest who have endeavoured to make these ancients their patterns. The most confiderable genius appears in the famous Taffo, and our Spenfer. Taffo, in his Aminta, has as far excelled all the Paftoral writers, as in his Gierufalemme he has outdone the epic Poets of his country. But as this piece feems to have been the original of a new fort of poem, the Paftoral Comedy in Italy, it cannot fo well be confidered as a copy of the ancients. Spenfer's Calendar, in M. Dryden's opinion, is

the most complete work of this kind, which any nation has produced ever fince the time of Virgil. Not but that he may be thought imperfect in fome few points. His Eclogues are fomewhat too long, if we compare them with the ancients. He is fometimes too allegorical, and treats of matters of Religion in a Paftoral style, as the Mantuan has done before him. He has employed the lyric meafure which is contrary to the practice of the old Poets. His ftanza is not ftill the fame, nor always well chofen. This last may be the reason his expreffion is fometimes not concife enough: for the tetraftic has obliged him to extend his fenfe to the length of four lines, which would have been more closely confined in the couplet.

In the manners, thoughts, and characters, he comes near to Theocritus himself; though not withstanding all the care he has taken, he is certainly inferior in his dialect: for the Doric had its beauty and propriety in the time of Theocritus. It was used in part of Greece, and fre uent in the mouths of many of the grea teft perfons; whereas the old English and country phrafes of Spenfer were either entirely obfolete, or fpoke only by people of the lowest condition. As there is a difference betwixt fimplicity and rufticity, fo the expreffion of fimple thoughts should be plain, but no clownish. The addition he has made of

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »