« ZurückWeiter »
I CONCLUDE this work according to my pro mise, with an account of the Comic Theatre, and entreat the reader, whether a favourer or an enemy of the ancient Drama, not to pass his censure upon the authors or upon me, without a regular perusal of
* Published by Mrs. Lennox in 4to. 1759. To the third volume of this work the following Advertisement is prefixed.« In this “ volume, the Discourse on the Greek Comedy, and the General “ Conclusion, are translated by the celebrated author of the Ram“ bler. The Comedy of the Birds, and that of Peace, by a young " Gentleman. The Comedy of the Frogs, by the learned and in
genious Dr. Gregory Sharpe. The Discourse upon the Cyclops, “ by John Bourrya, Esq. The Cyclops, by Dr. Grainger, author « of the translation of Tibullus." É.
this whole work. For, though it seems to be coniposed of pieces of which each may precede or follow without dependance upon the other, yet all the parts, taken together, form a system which would be destroyed by their disjunction. Which way shall we come at the knowledge of the ancients' shews, but by comparing together all that is left of them? The value and necessity of this comparison determined me to publish all, or to publish nothing. Besides, the reflections on each piece, and on the general taste of antiquity, which, in my opinion, are not without importance, have a kind of obscure gradation, which I have carefully endeavoured to preserve, and of which the thread would be lost by him who should slightly glance sometimes upon one piece, and sometimes upon
another. It is a structure which I have endeavoured to make as near to regularity as I could, and which must be seen in its full extent and in
succession. The reader who skips here and there over the book, might make a hundred objections which are either anticipated, oranswered in those pieces which he might have overlooked. I have laid such stress upon the connexion of the parts of this work, that I have declined to exhaust the subject, and have suppressed many of my notions, that I might leave the judicious reader to please himself by forming such conclusions as I supposed him like to discover, as well as myself. I am not here attempting to prejudice the reader by an apology either for the ancients, or my own manner. I have not claimed a right of obliging others to determine, by my opinion, the degrees of esteem which I think due to the authors of the Athenian Stage; nor do I think that their reputation in the present time, ought to depend upon my mode of thinking or expressing my thoughts, which I leave entirely to the judgment of the public.
Reasons why Aristophanes may be reviewed without
translating him entirely.
1. I WAS in doubt a long time, whether I should meddle at all with the Greek comedy, both, because the pieces which remain are very few, the licentiousness of Aristophanes, their author, is exorbitant, and it is very difficult to draw from the performances of a single poet, a just idea of Greek comedy. Besides, it seemed that tragedy was sufficient to employ all my attention, that I might give a complete representation of that kind of writing, which was most esteemed by the Athenians and the wiser Greeks*, particularly by Socrates, who set no value upon comedy or comic actors. But the very name of that drama, which in polite ages, and above all others in our own, has been so much advanced, that it has become equal to tragedy, if not preferable, incline me to think that I may be partly reproached with an imperfect work, if, after baving gone as deep as I could into the na
* There was a law which forbad any judge of the Areopagus to write comedy.
ture of Greek tragedy, I did not at least sketch a draught of the comedy.
I then considered, that it was not wholly impossible to surmount, at least in part, the difficulties which had stopt me, and to go somewhat farther than the learned writers*, who have published in French some pieces of Aristophanes; not that I pretend to make large translations. The same reasons which have hindered with respect to the more noble parts of the Greek drama, operate with double force upon my present subject. Though ridicule, which is the business of comedy, be not less uniform in all times, than the passions which are moved by tragic compositions; yet, if diversity of manners may sometimes disguise the passions themselves, how much greater change will be made in jocularities ? The truth is, that they are so much changed by the course of time, that pleasantry and ridicule become dull and flat much more easily than the pathetic becomes ridiculous.
That which is commonly known by the term jocular and comic, is nothing but a turn of expression, an airy phantom, that must be caught at a particular point. As we lose this point, we lose the jocularity, and find nothing but dulness in its place. A lucky sally, which has filled a company with laughter, will have no effect in print, because it is shewn single and separate from the circumstance which gave it force. Many satirical jests, found in ancient books, have had the same fate ; their spirit has evaporated by time, and has left nothing to us but insipidity, None but the most biting passages have preserved their points unblunted,
Madame Dacier, M. Boivin.