some English writers, who come under this Ibid. class. discovers this character. La Fontaine, in and unlaboured. Let us next confider 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. §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 genius, 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, Hefiod, Anacreon, Theocritus, Herodotus, and Xenophon, are all diftinguished for it. Among the Romans, also, we have fome writers of this character; particularly Terence, Lucretius, Phædrus, and Julius Cæfar. The following passage of Terence's Andria, is a beautiful instance of Simplicity of manner in description: Funus interim Procedit; fequimur; ad fepulchrum venimus; In ignem impofita eft; fletur; interea hæc foror Quam dixi, ad flammam acceffit imprudentiùs Satis cum periculo. Ibi tum exanimatus Pam philus Benè diffimulatum amorem, & celatum indicat; Occurrit præceps, mulierum ab igne retrahit, Mea Glycerium, inquit, quid agis? Cur te is perditum? Tum illa, ut confuetum facilè amorem cerneres, Rejecit se in eum, flens quam familiariter *. Аст. Ѕ. C. I. §25. Simplicity the Characteristic of TIL. LOTSON's Style. Simplicity is the great beauty of Archbishop Tillotson's manner. Tillotson has 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 fentences, in all these parts of oratory the Archbishop is exceedingly deficient. His Style is always pure, indeed, and perfpicuous, but careless and remiss, too often feeble and languid; little beauty in the conftruction of his sentences, which are frequently suffered to drag unharmoniously; seldom any attempt towards strength or fublimity. But, notwithstanding these defects, such a constant vein of good sense and piety runs through his works, such an earnest and ferious manner, and so much useful inftruction, 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 fimple and amiable writer, whose manner is strongly expressive of great goodness and worth. I observed before, that Simplicity of manner may be consistent with fome 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 languid manner. border on a flat and 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 exceed. ingly harmonious; smoothness, and what may be called amænity, are the diftinguishing characters of his manner; relaxing, fometimes, as fuch a manner will naturally do, into a prolix and remiss Style. No writer whatever has stamped upon his Style a more a more lively impression of his own cha- de Coverley discovers more genius than the racter. In reading his works, we seem engaged in conversation with him; we become thoroughly acquainted with him, not merely as an author, but as a man; and contract a friendship for him. He may be claffed as ftanding in the middle, between a negligent Simplicity, and the highest degree of Ornament which this character of Style admits. Blair. $27. Simplicity of Mr. ADDISON'S Style. Of the latter of these, the highest, most correct, and ornamented degree of the fimple manner, Mr. Addison is beyond doubt, in the English language, the most perfect critique on Milton. Ibid. §28. Simplicity of Style never wearies. 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 luftre. So powerful is the charm of Sim plicity 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; al though, other beauties being predominant, form not their peculiar and diftinguishthe midst of all his grandeur; and Deing character. Thus Milton is simple in mofthenes in the midst of all his vehe mence. example: and therefore, though not without fome faults, he is, on the whole, the fafeft model for imitation, and the freeft from confiderable defects, which the language affords. Perfpicuous 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 conftruction of his sentences easy, agreeable, and commonly very mufical; carrying a character of smoothness, more than of ftrength. In figurative language he is rich, particularly in fimilies and meta-§29. Lord SHAFTSBURY deficient in phors; which are so employed, as to render his Style splendid without being gaudy. There is not the least affectation in his manner; we fee no marks of labour; nothing forced or conftrained; but great elegance joined with great ease and fimplicity. He is, in particular, diftinguished by a character of modesty and of politenefs, which appears in all his writings. No author has a more popular and infinuating 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 composition. 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 profe writers, than he is intitled to among the poets; and, in profe, his humour is of a much higher and more original ftrain than his philofophy. The character of Sir Roger To grave and folemn writings, rable air. Accordingly, this has often Simplicity of manner adds the more venebeen remarked as the prevailing character throughout all the facred Scriptures: and indeed no other character of Style was fo much fuited to the dignity of inspiration. Simplicity of Style. Ibid. 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. Confiderable 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 infinuations against the Christian Religion; thrown out, too, with so much spleen and fatire, as do no honour to his memory, either as an author or a man. beauties. It is firm and supported in an His language has many 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 All this gives so much elegance and pomp to propriety, and with respect to cadence. to his language, that there is no wonder it should have been sometimes highly admired. It is greatly hurt, however, by perpetual petual stiffness and affectation. This is its capital fault. His lordship can express nothing with Simplicity. He feems to have confidered 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 fentence, we fee 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; fometimes happy in them; but his fondness for them is too visible; and having once laid hold of fome metaphor or allufion 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 Shaftibury possessed delicacy and refinement of taste, to a degree that we may call excessive and fickly; but he had little warmth of paffion; few strong or vigorous feelings; and the coldness of his character led him to that artificial and ftately 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 *. From the account which I have given of Lord Shaftsbury's manner, it may eafily be imagined, that he would miflead many who blindly admired him. Nothing is more dangerous to the tribe of imitators, than an author, who with many impofing beauties, has also some very confiderable blemishes. This is fully exemplified in Mr. Blackwall of Aberdeen, the author of the Life of Homer, the Letters on Mythology, and the Court of Augustus; a writer of confiderable learning, and of ingenuity alfo; but infected with an extravagant love of an artificial Style, and of that parade of * It may, perhaps, he not unworthy of being mentioned, that the first edition of his Enquiry into Virtue was published, furreptitioufly I believe, in feparate form, in the year 1699; and is fometimes to be met with: by comparing a which with the corrected edition of the fame treatife, as it now stands among his works, we fee one of the most curious and ufeful examples, that I know, of what is called Lime Labor; the art language which diftinguishes the Shaftsbu rean manner. Having now faid 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 fimply, and yet not beautifully. One may be free from affectation, and not have merit. The beautiful Simplicity supposes an author to pofsess real genius; to write with folidity, purity, and liveliness of imagination. In this cafe, the fimplicity 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 fufficient to conftitute the beauty of Style, weak, trißing, 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 "Chaite Simplicity of their manner;" which, in truth, is no other than the abfence 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 diftinction is easily made from the effect produced. The one never fails to interest the reader; the other is infipid and tiresome. Blair. §30. On the Vehement STYLE. I proceed to mention one other manner or character of Style, different from any that I have yet spoken of; which may be diftinguished by the name of the Vehement. This always implies strength; and is not, by any means, inconfiftent with Simplicity: but, in its predominant character, is distinguishable from either the ftrong or the fimple manner. It has a peculiar ardour; it is a glowing Style; the language of a man, whose imagination and paffions are heated, and ftrongly affected by what he writes; who is therefore negligent of lesser graces, but pours himself forth with the rapidity and fulness of a torrent. It belongs to the higher kinds of of polithing language, breaking long fentences, oratory, and indeed is rather expected and working up an imperfect draught into a highly-inished performance. from a man who is speaking, than from one who is writing in his closet. The ora 31. Lord BOLINGBROKE excelled in the Vehement Style. runs Among English writers, the one who has most of this character, though mixed, indeed, with feveral defects, is Lord Bolingbroke. Bolingbroke was formed by nature to be a factious leader; the demagogue of a popular afsembly. Accordingly, the Style St that through all his poItical 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 fame 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 fentences are varied as to length and shortness; inclining, however, most to long periods, sometimes including parenthefes, and frequently crowding and heap. ing a multitude of things upon one another, as naturally happens in the warmth of fpeaking. In the choice of his words, there is great felicity and precision. In exact construction of fentences, he is much inferior to Lord Shaftsbury; but greatly fuperior to him in life and ease. Upon the whole, his merit, as a writer, would have been very confiderable, if his matter had equalled his Style. But whilft we find many things to commend in the latter, in the former, as I before remarked, we can hardly find any thing to commend. In his reasonings, for the most part, he is flimfy and falfe; in his political writings, factious: in what he calls his philofophical ones, irreligious and fophiftical in the high. eit 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 fubject concerning which we are to write or fpeak. 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 fenfe, 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 frequently hard to diftinguish them. Whereever the impressions of things upon our minds are faint and indistinct, or perplexed and confused, our Style in treating of such things will infallibly be so too. what we conceive clearly and feel strongly, we will naturally express with clearness and with strength. This, then, we may be assured, is a capital rule as to Style, to think closely of the fubject, till we have attained a full and distinct view of the matter which we are to clothe in words, Whereas, § 33. Practice neceffary for forming a STYLE. In the second place, in order to form a good Style, the frequent practice of compofing is indispensably neceflary. 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 fort of compofing that will improve Style. This is so far from being the cafe, that by frequent careless and hafty compofition, we shall acquire cer. tainly a very bad Style; we shall have more trouble afterwards in unlearning faults, and correcting negligences, than if we had not been accustomed to composition at all. In the beginning, therefore, * "The most proper words for the most part "adhere to the thoughts which are to be expref"fed by them, and may be difcovered as by their "own light. But we hunt after them, as if they "were hidden, and only to be found in a corner. "Hence, instead of conceiving the words to lie "near the fubject, we go in quest of them to "fome other quarter, and endeavour to give force "to the expreffions we have found out." We we ought to write slowly, and with much care. Let the facility and speed of writing, be the fruit of longer practice. "Moram et " folicitudinem," says Quinctilian with the greatest reason, L. x. c. 3. "initiis impero. " Nam primum hoc constituendum ac obti" nendum eft, ut quam optimè scribamus: "celeritatem dabit confuetudo. Paulatim " res faciliùs se ostendent, verba responde" bunt, compofitio profequetur. Cuncta " denique et in familia benè instituta in " officio erunt. Summa hæc eft rei: citò * scribendo non fit ut benè scribatur; benè "scribendo, fit ut citò *. Blair. §34. Too anxious a Care about WORDS to be avoided. We must observe, however, that there may be an extreme in too great and anxious a care about Words. We must not retard the course of thought, nor cool the heat of imagination, by pausing too long on every word we employ. There is, on certain occafions, a glow of composition which should be kept up, if we hope to express ourselves happily, though at the expence of allowing some inadvertencies to pafs. A more severe examination of these must be left to be the work of correction. For if the practice of compofition be useful, the laborious work of correcting is no less so; it is indeed absolutely neceffary to our reaping any benefit from the habit of composition. What we have written should be laid by for some little time, till the ardour of composition be past, till the fondness for the expressions we have used be worn off, and the expreffions themselves be forgotten; and then review. ing our work with a cool and critical eye, as if it were the performance of another, we shall difcern many imperfections which at first escaped us. Then is the feason for pruning redundancies; for weighing the arrangement of sentences; for attending to the juncture and connecting particles; and bringing Style into a regular, correct, and supported form. This " Lime Labor" muft be fubmitted to by all who would * " I enjoin that fuch as are beginning the "practice of compofition, write flowly, and with "anxious deliberation. Their great object at first "should be, to write as well as poffible; prac"tice will enable them to write speedily. By " degrees matter will offer itself still more rea"dily; words will be at hand; composition will flow; every thing, as in the arrangement of "a well-ordered family, will present itself in " its proper place. The fum of the whole is this : "by hafty compofition, we shall never acquire "the art of compofing well; by writing well, "we hall come to write speedily." § 35. An Acquaintance with the best Authors neceffary to the Formation of a STYLE. In the third place, with respect to the affittance that is to be gained from the writings of others, it is obvious that we ought to render ourselves well acquainted with the Style of the best authors. This is requifite, both in order to form a just tafte in Style, and to supply us with a full stock of words on every subject. In reading authors with a view to Style, attention should be given to the peculiarities of their different manners; and in this and former Lectures I have endeavoured to suggest several things that may be useful in this view. I know no exercise that will be found more useful for acquiring a proper Style, than to translate some passage from an eminent English author, into our own words. What I mean is, to take, for instance, some page of one of Mr. Addison's Spectators, and read it carefully over two or three times, till we have got a firm hold of the thoughts contained in it; then to lay afide the book; to attempt to write out the passage from memory, in the best way we can; and having done fo, next to open the book, and compare what we have written with the style of the author. Such an exercise will, by comparison, shew us where the defects of our Styl Style lie; will lead us to the proper attentions for rectifying them; and, among the different ways in which the fame thought may be expressed, will make us perceive that which is the most beautiful. Ibida §36. A fervile Imitation to be avoided. In the fourth place, I must caution, at the fame time, against a fervile imitation of any one author whatever. This is always dangerous. It hampers genius; it is likely to produce a stiff manner; and those who are given to close imitation, generally imitate an author's faults as well as his beauties. No man will ever become a good writer, or speaker, who has not fome degree of confidence to follow his own genius. We ought to beware, in particular, ar, of adopting any author's noted phrases, or tranfcribing passages from him. Such |