to pursue; within certain bounds very beautiful; but when carried too far, approaching to intricacy, and hurting us by the appearance of being recherché, or far sought. Thus, we would naturally say, that Mr. Parnell is a poet of far greater simplicity, in his turn of thought, than Mr. Cowley Cicero's thoughts on moral subjects are natural; Seneca's too refined and laboured. In these two senses of Simplicity, when it is opposed either to variety of parts, or to refinement of thought, it has no proper relation to Style. There is a third sense of Simplicity, in which it has respect to Style; and stands opposed to too much ornament, or pomp of language; as when we say, Mr. Locke is a simple, Mr. Hervey, a florid writer; and it is in this sense, that the " simplex," the "tenue," or "subtile genus dicendi," is understood by Cicero and Quinctilian. The simple style, in this sense, coincides with the plain or the neat style, which I before mentioned; and, therefore, requires no farther illustration. But there is a fourth sense of Simplicity, also respecting Style; but not respecting the degree of ornament employed, so much as the easy and natural manner in which our language expresses our thoughts. This is quite different from the former sense of the word just now mentioned, in which Simplicity was equivalent to Plainness: whereas, in this sense, it is compatible with the highest ornament. Homer, for instance, possesses this Simplicity in the greatest perfection; and yet no writer has more ornament and beauty. This Simplicity, which is what we are now to consider, stands opposed, not to ornament, but to affectation of ornament, or appear ance of labour about our Style; and it is a distinguishing excellency in writing. Blair. There are no marks of art in his expres sion; it seems the very language of nature; you see in the Style, not the writer and his labour, but the man, in his own natural character. He may be rich in his expres. sion; he may be full of figures, and of fancy; but these flow from him without effort; and he appears to write in this manner, not because he has studied it, but because it is the manner of expression most natural to him. A certain degree of negligence, also, is not inconsistent with this character of style, and even not ungraceful in it; for too minute an attention to words is foreign to it: "Habeat ille," says Cicero, (Orat. No. 77.) molle quiddam, et "quod indicet non ingratam negligentiam hominis, de re magis quàm de verbo " laborantist." This is the great advantage of Simplicity of Style, that, like simplicity of manners, it shows us a man's sentiments and turn of mind laid open without disguise. More studied and artificial manners of writing, however beautiful, have always this disadvantage, that they exhibit an author in form, like a man at court, where the splendour of dress, and the ceremonial of behaviour, conceal those peculiarities which distinguish one man from another. But reading an author of Simplicity, is like conversing with a person of distinction at home, and with ease, where we find natural manners, and a marked character. Ibid. $23. On Naïveté. The highest degree of this simplicity is expressed by a French term to which we have none that fully answers in our language, Naïveté. It is not easy to give a precise idea of the import of this word. It always expresses a discovery of charac ter. I believe the best account of it is given by a French critic, M. Marmontel, who explains it thus: That sort of amiable ingenuity, or undisguised openness, which seems to give us some degree of superiority over the person who shews it; a certain infantine Simplicity, which we love in our hearts, but which displays some features of the character that we think we could have Speret idem, sudet multum, frustraque laboret art enough to hide; and which, therefore, always leads us to smile at the person who $22. SIMPLICITY appears easy. A writer of Simplicity expresses himself in such a manner, that every one thinks he could have written in the same way; Horace describes it, Ausus idem*. -ut sibi quivis * «From well-known tales such fictions would "Let this Style have a certain softness and ease, which shall characterise a negligence, "not unpleasing in an author who appears to be more solicitous about the thought than the expression." discovers discovers this character. La Fontaine, in his Fables, is given as the great example of such Naïveté. This, however, is to be understood, as descriptive of a particular species only of Simplicity. Blair. ge § 24. Ancients eminent for Simplicity. With respect to Simplicity, in general, we may remark, that the ancient original writers are always the most eminent for it. This happens from a plain reason, that they wrote from the dictates of natural nins, and were not formed upon the labours and writings of others, which is always in hazard of producing affectation. Hence, among the Greek writers, we have more models of a beautiful Simplicity than among the Roman. Homer, Hesiod, Anacreon, Theocritus, Herodotus, and Xenophon, are all distinguished for it. Among the Romans, also, we have some writers of this character; particularly Terence, Lucretius, Phædrus, and Julius Caesar. The following passage of Terence's An. dria, is a beautiful instance of Simplicity of manner in description: and unlaboured. Let us next consider some English writers who come under this Ibid. class. $25. Simplicity the characteristic of TILLOTSON'S Style. Simplicity is the great beauty of ArchTillotson has bishop Tillotson's manner. long been admired as an eloquent writer, and a model for preaching. But his eloquence, if we can call it such, has been often misunderstood. For if we include in the idea of eloquence, vehemence, and strength, picturesque description, glowing figures, or correct arrangement of sentences, in all these parts of oratory the Archbishop is exceedingly deficient. His Style is always pure, indeed, and perspicuous, but careless and remiss, too often feeble and of his sentences, which are frequently suf languid; little beauty in the construction fered to drag unharmoniously; seldom any attempt towards strength or sublimity. But, notwithstanding these defects, such a constant vein of good sense and piety runs through his works, such an earnest and se rious manner, and so much useful instruction, conveyed in a Style so pure, natural, and unaffected, as will justly recommend him to high regard, as long as the English language remains; not, indeed, as a model of the highest eloquence, but as a simple and amiable writer, whose manner is strongly expressive of great goodness and worth. I observed before, that Simplicity of manner may be consistent with some degree of negligence in Style; and it is only the beauty of that Simplicity which makes the negligence of such writers seem graceful. But, as appears in the Archbishop, negligence may sometimes be carried so far as to impair the beauty of Simplicity, and make it border on a flat and languid manner. Ibid. § 26. Simplicity of Sir WILLIAM TEMPLE'S Style. Sir William Temple is another remarkable writer in the Style of Simplicity. In point of ornament and correctness, he rises a degree above Tillotson; though, for correctness, he is not in the highest-rank. All is easy and flowing in him; he is exceedingly harmonious; smoothness, and what may be called amenity, are the distinguishing characters of his manner; relaxing, sometimes, as such a manner will naturally do, into a prolix and remiss Style. No writer whatever has stamped upon his Style Z 2 a more Of the latter of these, the highest, most correct and ornamented degree of the simple manner, Mr. Addison is beyond doubt, in the English language, the most perfect example: and therefore, though not without some faults, he is, on the whole, the safest model for imitation, and the freest from considerable defects, which the language affords. Perspicuous and pure he is in the highest degree; his precision, indeed, not very great; yet nearly as great as the subjects which he treats of require: the construction of his sentences easy, agreeable, and commonly very musical; carrying a character of smoothness, more than of strength. In figurative language he is rich, particularly in similes and metaphors ; which are so employed as to render his Style splendid without being gaudy. There is not the least affectation in his manner; we see no marks of labour; nothing forced or constrained; but great elegance joined with great ease and simplicity. He is, in particular, distinguished by a character of modesty and of politeness, which appears in all his writings. No author has a more popular and insinuating manner; and the great regard which he every where shews for virtue and religion, recommends him highly. If he fails in any thing, it is in want of strength and precision, which renders his manner, though perfectly suited to such essays as he writes in the Spectator, not altogether a proper model for any of the higher and more elaborate kinds of com. position. Though the public have ever done much justice to his merit, yet the nature of his merit has not always been seen in its true light for, though his poetry be elegant, he certainly bears a higher rank among the prose writers, than he is entitled to among the poets; and, in prose, his humour is of a much higher and more origial strain than his philosophy. The charac ter of Sir Roger de Coverley discovers more genius than the critique on Milton. Ibid. $28. Simplicity of Style never varies. Such authors as those, whose characters I have been giving, one never tires of reading. There is nothing in their manner that strains or fatigues our thoughts: we are pleased, without being dazzled by their lustre. So powerful is the charm of Simplicity in an author of real genius, that it atones for many defects, and reconciles us to many a careless expression. Hence, in all the most excellent authors, both in prose and verse, the simple and natural manner may be always remarked; although, other beauties being predominant, these form not their peculiar and distinguishing character. Thus Milton is simple in the midst of all his grandeur; and Demosthenes in the midst of all his vehemence. To grave and solemn writings, Simplicity of manner adda the more venerable air. Accordingly, this has often been remarked as the prevailing character throughout all the sacred Scrip. tures: and indeed no other character of Style was so much suited to the dignity of inspiration. Ibid. $29. Lord SHAFTSBURY deficient in Simplicity of Style. Of authors who, notwithstanding many excellencies, have rendered their Style much less beautiful by want of Simplicity, I cannot give a more remarkable example than Lord Shaftsbury. This is an author on whom I have made observations several times before; and shall now take leave of him, with giving his general character under this head. Considerable merit, doubtless, he has. His works might be read with profit for the moral philosophy which they contain, had he not filled them with so many oblique and invidious insinuations against the Christian Religion; thrown out, too, with so much spleen and satire, as do no honour to his memory, either as an author or a man. His language has many beauties. It is firm and supported in an uncommon degree: it is rich and musical. No English author, as I formerly shewed, has attended so much to the regular construction of his sentences, both with respect to propriety, and with respect to cadence. All this gives so much elegance and pomp to his language, that there is no wonder it should have been sometimes sometimes highly admired. It is greatly burt, however, by perpetual stiffness and affectation. This is its capital fault. His lordship can express nothing with Simplicity. He seems to have considered it as vulgar, and beneath the dignity of a man of quality to speak like other men. Hence he is ever in buskins; full of circumlocutions and artificial elegance. In every sentence, we see the marks of labour and art; nothing of that ease which expresses a sentiment coming natural and warm from the heart. Of figures and ornament of every kind, he is exceedingly fond; sometimes happy in them; but his fondness for them is too visible; and having once laid hold of some metaphor or allusion that pleased him, he knows not how to part with it. What is most wonderful, he was a professed admirer of Simplicity; is always extolling it in the ancients, and censuring the moderns for the want of it; though he departs from it himself as far as any one modern whatever. Lord Shaftsbury possessed delicacy and refinement of taste, to a degree that we may call excessive and sickly; but he had little warmth of passion; few strong or vigorous feelings; and the coldness of his character led him to that artificial and stately manner which appears in his writings. He was fonder of nothing than of wit and raillery; but he is far from being happy in it. He attempts it often, but always awkwardly ; he is stiff, even in his pleasantry; and laughs in form, like an author, and not like a man *. language which distinguishes the Shaftsburean manner. Having now said so much to recommend Simplicity, or the easy and natural manner of writing, and having pointed out the defects of an opposite manner; in order to prevent mistakes on this subject, it is necessary for me to observe, that it is very possible for an author to write simply, and yet not beautifully. One may be free from affectation, and not have merit. The beautiful Simplicity supposes an author to possess real genius; to write with solidity, purity, and liveliness of imagination. In this case, the simplicity or unaffectedness of his manner, is the crowning ornament; it heightens every other beauty; it is the dress of nature, without which all beauties are imperfect. But if mere unaffectedness were sufficient to constitute the beauty of Style, weak, trifling, and dull writers might often lay claim to this beauty. And accordingly we frequently meet with pretended critics, who extol the dullest writers on account of what they call the "Chaste Simplicity of, their manner;" which, in truth, is no other than the absence of every ornament, through the mere want of genius and imagination. We must distinguish, therefore, between that Simplicity which accompanies true genius, and which is perfectly compatible with every proper ornament of Style; and that which is no other than a careless and slovenly manner. Indeed the distinction is easily made from the effect produced. The one never fails to interest the reader; the other is insipid and tiresome. Blair. $30. On the Vehement STYLE. From the account which I have given of Lord Shaftsbury's manner, it may easily be imagined, that he would mislead many who blindly admired him. Nothing is more dangerous to the tribe of imitators, I proceed to mention one other manner than an author, who, with many imposing or character of Style, different from any beauties, has also some very considerable that I have yet spoken of; which may be blemishes. This is fully exemplified in distinguished by the name of the VeheMr. Blackwall of Aberdeen, the author of ment. This always implies strength; and the Life of Homer, the Letters on Mytho- is not, by any means, inconsistent with logy, and the Court of Augustus; a writer Simplicity: but, in its predominant chaof considerable learning, and of ingenuity racter, is distinguishable from either the also; but infected with an extravagant love strong or the simple manner. It has a pe of an artificial Style, and of that parade of culiar ardour; it is a glowing Style; the * It may, perhaps, be not unworthy of being language of a man, whose imagination and mentioned, that the first edition of his Enquiry passions are heated, and strongly affected into Virtue was published, surreptitiously I believe, in a separate form, in the year 1699, and by what he writes; who is therefore negis sometimes to be met with: by comparing forth with the rapidity and fulness of a ligent of lesser graces, but pours himself treatise, as it now stands among his works, we torrent. It belongs to the higher kinds of see one of the most curious and useful examples, oratory; and indeed is rather expected that I know, of what is called Lima Labor; the art of polishing language, breaking long senfrom a man who is speaking, than from tences, and working up an imperfect draught one who is writing in his closet. The orainto a highly finished performance. which with the corrected edition of the same tions tions of Demosthenes furnish the full and perfect example of this species of Style. Blair. $31. Lord BOLINGBROKE excelled in the Vehement Style. Among English writers, the one who has most of this character, though mixed, indeed, with several defects, is Lord Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke was formed by nature to be a factious leader; the demagogue of a popular assembly. Accordingly, the Style that runs through all his political writings, is that of one declaiming with heat, rather than writing with deliberation. He abounds in rhetorical figures; and pours himself forth with great impetuosity. He is copious to a fault; places the same thought before us in many different views; but generally with life and ardour. He is bold, rather than correct; a torrent that flows strong, but often muddy. His sentences are varied as to length and shortness; inclining, however, most to long periods, sometimes including parentheses, and frequently crowding and heaping a multitude of things upon one another, as naturally. happens in the warmth of speaking. In the choice of his words, there is great feliIn exact construccity and precision. tion of sentences, he is much inferior to Lord Shaftsbury: but greatly superior to him in life and ease. Upon the whole, his merit, as a writer, would have been very considerable, if his matter had equalled his Style. But whilst we find many things to commend in the latter, in the former, as I before remarked, we can hardly find any thing to comn end. In his reasonings, for the most part, he is flimsy and false; in his political writings, factious: in what he calls his philosophi cal ones, irreligious and sophistical in the highest degree. Ibid. $32. Directions for forming a STYLE. It will be more to the purpose, that I conclude these dissertations upon Style with a few directions concerning the proper method of attaining a good Style in general; leaving the particular character of that Style to be either formed by the subject on which we write, or prompted by the bent of genius. The first direction which I give for this purpose, is, to study clear ideas on the subject concerning which we are to write or speak. This is a direction which may at first appear to have small relation to Style. Its relation to it, however, is extremely close. The foundation of all good Style, is good sense, accompanied with a lively imagination. The Style and thoughts of a writer are so intimately connected, that, as I have several times hinted, it is fre quently hard to distinguish them. Whereminds are faint and indistinct, or perplexed ever the impressions of things upon our and confused, our Style in treating of such things will infallibly be so too. Whereas, what we conceive clearly and feel strongly, and with strength. This, then, we may be we will naturally express with clearness assured, is a capital rule as to Style, to think closely of the subject, till we have attained a full and distinct view of the matter which we are to clothe in words, till we become warm and interested in it; then, and not till then, shall we find exing, the best and most proper expressions, pression begin to flow. Generally speak. are those which a clear view of the subject after them. This is Quinctilian's observasuggests, without much labour or inquiry tion, Lib. viii. c. 1. tion, Lib. viii. c. 1. Plerumque optima "verba rebus cohærent, et cernuntur suo ❝ lumine. At nos quærimus illa, tan"quam lateant seque subducant. Ita nunquam putamus verba esse circa id de quo dicendum est; sed ex aliis locis pe"timus, et inventis vim asserimus." 66 In the second place, in order to form a good Style, the frequent practice of composing is indispensably necessary. Many rules concerning Style I have delivered; but no rules will answer the end without exercise and habit. At the same time, it is not every sort of composing that will improve Style. This is so far from being the case, that by frequent, careless, and hasty composition, we shall acquire certainly a very bad Style: we shall have more trouble afterwards in unlearning faults, and correcting negligences, than if we had not been accustomed to compo sition at all. In the beginning, therefore, *"The most proper words for the most part "adhere to the thoughts which are to be express "ed by them, and may be discovered as by "their own light. But we hunt after them, as "if they were bidden, and only to be found in Hence, instead of conceiving the "words to lie near the subject, we go in quest "of them to some other quarter, and endea"vour to give force to the expressions we have "found out." a corner. we |