writing, fo carelessly exerted, that he has no ftruction of the Latin, in the arrangement firm hold of the conception which he would of fentences. Hooker, for instance, begins communicate to us; the marks of all this will the Preface to his celebrated work of Ecclearly appear in his Style. Several unmean-clefiaftical Polity with the following fentence: ing words and loof epithets will be found;" Though for no other caufe, yet for this, his expreffions will be vague and general; his "that pofterity may know that we have not arrangement indiftinct and feeble; we fhall" loofely, through filence, permitted things conceive fomewhat of his meaning, but our conception will be faint. Whereas a nervous writer, whether he employs an extended or a concife Style, gives us always a ftrong im-" preffion of his meaning; his mind is full of his fubject, and his words are all expreffive:" every phrafe and every figure which he ufes, tends to render the picture which he would fet before us, more lively and complete. Blair. 15. On Harfbness of STYLE. "to pafs away as in a dream, there fhall be, "for men's information, extant this much, "concerning the prefent state of the church of God eftablished amongst us, and their careful endeavours which would have upheld the fame." Such a sentence now founds harth in our ears. Yet fome advantages certainly attended this fort of Style; and whether we have gained, or loft, upon the whole, by departing from it, may bear a queftion. By the freedom of arrangement, which it permitted, it rendered the language ex-fufceptible of more strength, of more variety, of collocation, and more harmony of period. But, however this be, fuch a Style is now obfolete; and no modern writer could adopt it without the cenfure of harthnefs and affectation. The prefent form which the Language has affumed, has, in fome measure, facrificed the ftudy of ftrength to that of perfpicuity and eafe. Our arrangement of words has become lefs forcible perhaps, but mere plain and natural : and this is now understood to be the genius of our Language. As every good quality in Style has an treme, when purfued to which it becomes faulty, this holds of the Nervous Style as well as others. Too great a ftudy of strength, to the neglect of the other qualities of Style, is found to betray writers into a harsh manner. Harthnefs arifes from unufual words, from forced inverfions in the conftruction of a fentence, and too much neglect of smoothnefs and cafe. This is reckoned the fault of fome of our earliest claffics in the English Language; fuch as Sir Walter Raleigh, Sir Francis Bacon, Hooker, Chillingworth, Milton in his profe works, Harrington, Cudworth, and other writers of confiderable note in the Days of Queen Elizabeth, James I. The dry manner excludes all ornament of and Charles I. These writers had nerves every kind, content with being understood, and ftrength in a high degree, and are to this it has not the leaft aim to please either the day eminent for that quality in Style. But fancy or the ear. This is tolerable only in the language in their hands was exceedingly pure didactic writing; and even there to different from what it is now, and was indeed make us bear it, great weight and folidity of câtirely formed upon the idiom and con-matter is requifite; and entire perfpicuity of § 16. On the Dry STYLE. Ibid. language. language. Ariftotle is the complete example of a Dry Style. Never, perhaps, was there any author who adhered fo rigidly to the ftrictnefs of a didactic manner, throughout all his writings, and conveyed fo much inftruc- This laft was the cafe with Dean Swift, tion, without the leaft approach to ornament. who may be placed at the head of thofe that With the most profound genius, and exten- have employed the Plain Style. Few writers ve views, he writes like a pure intelligence, have difcovered more capacity. He treats who addreffes himself folely to the under-every fubject which he handles, whether feLanding, without making any ufe of the channel of the imagination. But this is a manner which deferves not to be imitated. For, although the goodnefs of the matter may compenfate the drynefs or harfhnefs of the Style, yet is that drynefs a confiderable defect; as it fatigues attention, and conveys our fen-look for much ornament and grace in his timents, with difadvantage, to the reader or hearer. Blair. about; either, because he thinks it unneceffary to his fubject; or, because his genius does not lead him to delight in it; or, because it leads him to defpife it. §17. On the Plain STYLE. A Plain Style rifes one degree above a dry e. A writer of this character employs very little ornament of any kind, and refts almost entirely upon his fenfe. But, if he is no pains to engage us by the employment of figures, mufical arrangement, or any other art of writing, he ftudies, however, to avoid difgufting us, like a dry and a harsh writer. Beides Perfpicuity, he purfues Propriety, Purity, and Precision, in his language; which form one degree, and no inconfiderable one, of beauty. Livelinefs, too, and force, may be unfiftent with a very Plain Style: and therefore, fuch an author, if his fentiments are food, may be abundantly agreeable. The difference between a dry and a plain writer, , that the former is incapable of ornament; and feems not to know what it is; the latter. feeks not after it. He gives us his meaning, in good language, diftinct and pure; any funtar ornament he gives himself no trouble rious or ludicrous, in a mafterly manner. He knew, almoft beyond any man, the Purity, the Extent, the Precifion of the English Lan guage; and, therefore, to fuch as with to attain a pure and correct Style, he is one of the moft ufeful models. But we must not Language. His haughty and morofe genius made him defpife any embellishment of this kind, as beneath his dignity. He delivers his fentiments in a plain, downright, pofitive manner, like one who is fure he is in the right; and is very indifferent whether you be pleafed or not. His fentences are commonly negligently arranged; diftinctly enough as to the fenfe, but without any regard to fmoothnefs of found, often without much regard to compactnefs or elegance. If a metaphor, or any other figure, chanced to render his fatire more poignant, he would, perhaps, vouchfafe to adopt it, when it came in his way; but if it tended only to embellish and illuftrate, he would rather throw it afide. Hence, in his On this head, of the general characters of Style, particularly the plain and the fimple, and the characters of thofe English authors who are claffed under them, in this and the following lectures (xix) feveral ideas have been taken from a fhewn to me, many years ago, by the learned and manufcript treatife on rhetoric, part of which was ingenious author, Dr. Adam Smith, and which, it is hoped, will be given by him to the Public ferious ferious pieces, his Style often borders upon the dry and unpleating: in his humorous ones, the plainnefs of his manners fets off his wit to the highest advantage. There is no froth nor affectation in it; it feems native and unftudied; and while he hardly appears to fimile himself, he makes his reader laugh heartily. To a writer of fuch genius as Dean Swift, the Plain Style was moft admirably fitted. Among our philofophica! writers, Mr. Locke comes under this clafs; perfpicuous and pure, but almoft without any ornament whatever. In works which admit, or require, ever so much ornament, there are parts where the plain manner ought to predominate. But we must remember, that when this is the character which a writer affects throughout his whole compofition, great weight of matter, and great force of fentiment, are required, in order to keep up the reader's attention, and prevent him froin becoming tired of the author. Blair. His figures, if he ufes any, are fhort and correct; rather than bold and glowing. Such a Style as this may be attained by a writer who has no great powers of fancy or genius, by industry merely, and careful attention to the rules of writing; and it is a Style always agreeable. It imprints a character of moderate elevation on our compofition, and carries a decent degree of ornament, which is not unfuitable to any fubject whatever. A familiar letter, or a law paper, on the drieft fubject, may be written with neatnefs; and a fermon, or a philofophical treatife, in a Neat Style, will be read with pleasure. Ibid. 19. On the Elegant STYLE. An Elegant Style is a character, expreffing a higher degree of ornament than a neat one; and, indeed, is the term ufually applied to Style, when poffeffing all the virtues of ornament, without any of its excefles or defects. From what has been formerly delivered, it will easily be understood, that complete Eleguce implies great perfpicuity and propriety; purity in the choice of words, and care and dexterity in their harmonious and happy arrangement. It implies, farther, the grace and beauty of imagination fpread over Style, as far as the fubject admits it; and all the illustration which figurative language adds, when properly employed. In a word, an elegant writer is one who pleafes the fancy and the car, while he informs the understanding and who gives us his ideas clothed with all the beauty of exprethon, but not overcharged with any of its mifplaced finery. In this clafs, therefore, we place only the firft rate §18 On the Neat STYLE. What is called a Neat Style comes next in order; and here we are got into the region of ornament; but that ornament not of the higheft or most sparkling kind. A writer of this character fhews, that he does not defpife the beauty of language. It is an object of his attention. But his attention is fhewn in the choice of his words, and in a graceful collocation of them; rather than in any high efforts of imagination, or elaquence. His fentences are always clean, and free from the incumbrance of fuperflucus words; of a moderate length; rather inclining to brevity, than a fwelling structure; clofing with pro-riters in the language; fuch as Addison, priety; without any tails, or adjections dragging after the proper clofe. His cadence is varied; but not of the studied musical kind. | Dryden, Pope, Temple, Bolingbroke, Arterbury, and a few more; writers who differ widely from one another in many of the attributes attributes of Style, but whom we now clafs to gether, under the denomination of Elegant, 25, in the fcale of Ornament, poffeffing nearly the fame place. Blair. 20. On the Florid STYLE. nation, and reject, as juvenile, all fuch or-. naments as are redundant, unfuitable to the fubject, or not conducive to illuftrate it. Nothing can be more contemptible than that tinfel fplendour of language, which fome writers perpetually affect. It were well, if When the ornaments, applied to Style, are this could be afcribed, to the real overflowing jet; when they r too rich and gaudy in proportion to the fub- of a rich imagination. We fhould then have return upon us too faft, and fomething to amufe us, at least, if we found frike us either with a dazzling luftre, or a little to inftruct us. But the worst is, that falle brilliancy, this forms what is called with thofe frothy writers, it is a luxuriancy of Florid Style a term commonly used to fig- words, not of fancy. We fee a laboured nify the excefs of ornament. In a young attempt to rife to a fplendour of compofition, compofer this is very pardonable. Perhaps, of which they have formed to themfelves fome it is even a promifing fymptom, in young loofe idea but having no strength of ge people, that their Style mould incline to the nius for attaining it, they endeavour to fupply Florid and Luxuriant: "Volo fe efferat in the defect by poctical words, by cold, exadolefcente fecunditas," fays Quinctilian, clamations, by common-place figures, and "multum inde decoquent anni, multum ratio every thing that has the appearance of limabit, aliquid velut ufu ipfo deteretur; fit and magnificence. It has efcaped thefe modo unde excidi poffit quid et exculpi. writers, that fobriety in ornament, is one great Audcat hæc ætas plura, et inveniat, et in- fecret for rendering it pleafing; and that ventis gaudeat, fint licet illa non fatis in- without a foundation of good fenfe and foterim ficca et fevera. Facile remedium eft lid thought, the moft Florid Style is bo: a ubertatis fterilia nullo labore vincuntur." childish impofition on the Public. The Pub Bat, although the Florid Style may be allic, however, are but too apt to be fo imposed qwed to youth, in their firft effays, it must on, at least, the mob of readers; who are receive the fame indulgence from writers very ready to be caught, at first, with whatof maturer years. It is to be expected, that ever is dazzling and gaudy. judgment, as it ripens, should chatten imagi * "In youth, I wish to fee luxuriancy of fancy appear. Much of it will be diminished by years; "much will be corrected by ripening judgment; Tome of it, by the mere practice of compofition, will be worn away. Let there beonly fufficient matter, at firft, that can bear fome pruning and opping off. At this time of life, let genius be bold and inventive, and pride itfelf in its efforts, though, thefe fhould not, as yet be eorfor bartennefs there is no remedy redt. Luxuriancy can cafily be cured; but pomp I cannot help thinking, that it reflects more honour on the religious turn, and good difpofitions of the prefent age, than on the public tafte, that Mr Hervey's Meditations, have had fo great a currency. The pious and be nevolent heart which is alwa» difplayed in them, and the lively fancy which, on fore occafions, appears, juftly merited applaufe but the perpetual glitter. of expreifion, the fwoln imagery, and trained defeription which abound in them, are ornaments of a falfe kind, I would, therefore, advife ftudents G of of oratory, to imitate Mr. Harvey's piety rather than his Style; and, in all compofitions of a ferious kind, to turn their attention, as Mr. Pope fays, " from founds to "things, from fancy to the heart." Admonitions of this kind I have already had occafion to give, and may hereafter repeat them; as I conceive nothing more incumbent on me, in this course of Lectures, than to take every opportunity of cautioning my readers against the affected and frivolous ufe of ornament; and, instead of that flight and fuperficial tafte in writing, which I apprehend to be at prefent too fashionable, to introduce, as far as my endeavours can avail, a tafte for more folid thought, and more manly fimplicity in Style. are what arife naturally; what the occafion or the fubject fuggefts unfought; and what, when once fuggefted, are cafily apprehended by all. Refinement in writing, expreffes lefs natural and obvious train of thought, and which it required a peculiar turn of genius to purfue; within certain bounds very beautiful; but when carried too far, ap proaching to intricacy, and hurting us by the appearance of being recherché, or far fought. Thus, we would naturally fay, that Mr. Parnell is a poet of far greater fimplicity, in his turn of thought, than Mr. Cowley: Cicero's thoughts on moral fubjects are natural; Seneca's too refined and laboured. In thefe two fenfes of Simplicity, when it Blair.is oppofed either to variety of parts, or to refinement of thought, it has no proper rela 51. On the different Kinds of SIM- tion to Style. PLICITY. The first is, Simplicity of Compofition, as oppofed to too great a variety of parts. Horace's precept refers to this: Denique fit quod vis simplex duntaxat et unum®. This is the fimplicity of plan in a tragedy, a diftinguished from double plots, and crowded incidents, the Simplicity of the Iliad, or Aneid, in oppofition to the digreffions of Lucan, and the fcattered tales of Ariofto; the Simplicity of Grecian architecture, in op. petition to the irregular variety of the Gothic. In this fenfe, Simplicity is the fame with Unity. The end fenfe is, Simplicity of Thought, as opposed to refinement. Simple thoughts «They learn the wand'ring demour to * And keep one equal timone through the BBARCIA 66 There is a third fenfe of Simplicity, in which it has respect to Style; and ftands oppofed to too much ornament, or pomp of language: as when we fay, Mr. Locke is a fimple, Mr. Harvey a florid, writer; and it is in this fenfe, that the “ fimplex,” the “tenue,” or “fubtile genus dicendi," is underfood by Cicero and Quinctilian. The fimple style, in this fenfe, coincides with the plain or the neat ftyle, which I before mentioned; and, therefore, requires no farther illuftration. But there is a fourth fenfe of Simplicity alfo refpecting Style; but not refpecting the degree of ornament employed, fo much as the caly and natural manner in which our Jah age exprettes our thoughts. This is quite different from the former fenfe of the ward jaft now mentioned, in which Simplicity was equivalent to pisanes; whereas in this 'fense, it is compatible with the higheft oran ment. Hemer, for instance, poffeffes this Simplicity |