Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

plays, however, which deserve a better fate; the poetry of "The Indian Princess," and the dialogue of "Tears and Smiles," ought to protect them from the chilling neglect of general indifference.

The two productions, of which we have now undertaken the review, we are fearful will be placed, after the lapse of a few years, upon the shelf with these tame and inanimate compositions. Although one of them is a tragedy, and the other a comedy, and we may, therefore, be subjected to censure for comprehending them in one review, yet we believe, from the serious structure of both, we shall be justified by the judicious, for considering them under so general a view, as we certainly shall by the author himself, who classes "The Poor Lodger" in his advertisement neither as a tragedy nor comedy, but as something distinct from both; of a mixed character, and partaking rather of the solemn than the gay. Besides, in attentively considering the merits of the two productions, we can perceive no objections to the style or genius which is displayed by the author, which will not apply to both as well as to either; and in relation to plot and preservation of character, where any distinct observations may be required, we can make them specifically as we proceed.

It is the fate both of "The Clergyman's Daughter," and "The Poor Lodger," to be serious prosaick dramas, and to be liable to the objection of having only borrowed fables to recommend them, so that any interest resulting from the plot is fairly to be ascribed to Miss Burney or Mr. Makenzie; and all the praise justly to be awarded to Mr. White, must result from the ability with which he has been able to preserve the characters in the composition of the dialogue. But even this praise, according to Dr. Johnson, is of the lowest order, since it is evident that the genius required to convey thoughts in mere prose, bears no great proportion to the ability which is required to express them with characteristick propriety in verse. For the language of his characters we have no very grateful remarks to lavish upon our author. Indeed with but few exceptions, it appears to us to consist of such a sameness of expression, that we have no doubt the speeches could be transferred from one part to another, without interfering with any of the peculiarities of style, which by a true dramatist, should be conferred upon his personages, so as to distinguish their dialogue by evident characteristicks.

Mr. White has certainly adopted very judicious ideas upon the subject of the unities of time, place, and action, as well as with regard to the advantages to be derived from the mingled drama; but with these true and indisputable principles to support him, the triteness of his infantile thoughts, and destitution of force in conveying them, inevitably reduce his two plays below the mediocrity of Kenny or Allingham.

The Clergyman's Daughter, in regard to its plot, is much more skilfully conducted than the Poor Lodger; in which we are inclined to imagine that the author, presuming too much upon the general circulation of Evelina, the novel upon which it is founded, has left a number of chasms in the story, which a perfect recollection of Miss Burney's work will alone enable us to supply. The connection of Mrs. Clifford with Harriot Bloomville is not satisfactorily explained; she is introduced for no adequate purpose. Her house is forced to be a place for our heroine to visit, but to promote what purpose of the fable, or why Mrs. Clifford was her friend, or with what branch of the plot she is connected, requires a more full elucidation than can be discovered from the Poor Lodger. The character is introduced to the audience with frigid indifference, and is dismissed with undisturbed tranquility.

The unrestricted power which Widow Danvers has over the actions of Harriot, is not so much a matter of course, that no reason should be assigned for its existence: why, having a kind guardian in the country, should she remain in town, tortured by the barbarities of her insolence, and the ignorant brutality of her companions? We also become acquainted with this guardian, Mr. Sedley, without a due gradation of preparatory explanation: and the characters are all trundled off to his place of residence in the country without adequate motives. Sir Harry Stormant, Widow Danvers, and Joblin, make their appearance at Berry-Hill, in Mr. Sedley's garden, without obvious or assignable cause, and even Lord Harley gets introduced there by a very lame and halting sort of expedient. As to the characters of this play, we are afraid they will not endure a comparison with the corresponding personages in Evelina.

Sir Harry Stormant, in the Poor Lodger, is a compound of Lovell and Sir Clement Willoughby, intending to combine the artful subtlety of the latter, with the ennui and foppish inanity of the former character. Now the author, by such a

.

combination, has spoiled two good characters to make an anomaly, in which the vapidity and listnessness of Lovel naturally counteract the acuteness of stratagem in Sir Clement.

The character of Lord Orville, the elegant, sensible, and all accomplished gentleman, is hardly to be discerned in so mean a copy as that of Lord Harley. The manners of Orville, dictated by the most consummate deference, and his mind enriched by all the learning of the scholar, and chastened by a cultivated taste and uncommonly good sense, degenerate in his representative, the first into cold complaisance, and the last into a languid expression of trite and every-day observations.

The Widow Danvers, is intended for Madam Duval; but she is so completely changed by the change of dialect, that we begin to imagine more than half the pleasure we derive from a contemplation of that character in the novel, rises from -the frenchified blunders she commits, and the unique cast of drollery, which the mixed jargon she utters impresses upon it.

No one we believe will imagine the heroine of Mr. White's play can compare with Evelina, in respect to mind, to manners, or force of character.

Although we have already remarked that the Clergyman's Daughter deserves the preference over the Poor Lodger, yet we do not mean to assert that it is not liable to very solid objections, in the conduct of the characters, and management of plot. The general remarks which we have suggested respecting the want of discrimination in the language of the various characters which our author introduces, are perhaps more applicable to the former than the latter production; and both are chargeable with great weakness of expression, and the introduction of common place observations.

It was a remark, a few years ago, that there exists in this country such a want of determination of judgment respecting American plays, and indeed such prejudices against them, that an author would be obliged to struggle in his flight to renown, against an intolerable weight which every moment would threaten to sink him to the earth. We think it, a fortunate circumstance that our author has been treated by the publick in a manner at the same time so liberal and munificent, that it will go very far to refute the absurdity of this charge. If the Clergyman's Daughter can attract six full houses, and the Poor Lodger four, in Boston, what might not

[blocks in formation]

be expected from a production which should combine genius with judgment, and unite just conception of character with faithful delineation. In such an event we have no doubt the American publick would become as enthusiastick as they have been indifferent; and as they have been considered captious because they have not yet had a fair chance to praise with justice, so they would probably, when an opportunity should be offered, pass into the opposite extreme, and bestow such excessive panegyricks as no effort could authorize or deserve.

INTELLIGENCE.

From the London Monthly Repository.

On the effects of the industry of the literati of Germany on the literature of that country; and on the influence of the four last years of war upon it.

(Continued from page 67.)

THE German literati in general know at least the names of the most distinguished writers of all ages; and as the history of literature is a favourite study, are acquainted with the particulars of their lives and works. This is a great check upon national conceit, which sometimes renders the literati of other countries equally unjust and ridiculous; and it produces the salutary spirit of cosmopolitism, without which, a knowledge of foreign merit is not easily acquired.

On the other hand, the German literati have also learned to appreciate their own merits; a natural consequence of incessant comparison. But this just estimation of their own worth and the courage to exhibit themselves before foreigners, whose vanity often looked down upon them with contempt, are not of very long standing. They date only forty or fifty years back, since the nation began to discover the great advantages of its language and literature, to cultivate them, and to write principally in German. It is generally known that Frederick the Great, by his contempt of German literature, strongly excited the pride of his countrymen; so that it made a gigantick progress, while the most celebrated hero of the nation sought to depreciate its native writers. Till his time, the generality of German authors had neglected their own language, and it

was still a prevailing practice to write a great deal in Latin ; but since that period, an universal anxiety to express themselves in their native tongue with accuracy, perspicuity, and grace, has pervaded the whole nation. It was extremely fortunate that Lessing, a man of first-rate genius and rare attainments, together with others possessing similar qualifications, gave a proper direction to these efforts of his countrymen in the celebrated Letters on Literature. In fact, the commencement of the golden age of German literature cannot be fixed more than ten years before his time, namely, about 1740, where Eichhorn, after the example of others, has placed it. No sooner did the nation become sensible of its own importance, no sooner did the polishing, rounding, and enriching of the native language allow German industry free scope, than such a number of distinguished writers sprung up in all the provinces of Germany, and in the countries where its language is spoken, that none but so indefatigable a people could, in comparatively so short a period (since 1740), have produced such a rich harvest. We shall merely mention some of the most conspicuous names. Haller, Klopstock, Zachariä, Hagedorn, Gellert, Rabener, Weisse, Lichtwehr, Uz, Gleim, Jerusalem, Gotter, Lessing, Pfeffel, Ramler, Kleist, Wieland, Mendelsohn, Sturz, von Nicolai, Götz, Herder, Gessner, Zollikofer, Kästner, Voss, Göcking, the Counts Stolberg, Hölty, Jacobi, Lichtenberg, Musæus, Göthe, Bürger, Schiller, Claudius, Matthison, Kosegarten, Iffland, Grossmann, Babo, Engel, Meissner, Kotzebue, Grave, Schmidt, Johannes Müller, Archenholz, Fr. Schulz, Müller of Itzehoe, Knigge, Lafontaine, Woltmann, Rochlitz, and a great number of others, have produced models in every departmet of literature, which, even in the opinion of competent judges abroad, need not fear a comparison with foreign excellence.

[ocr errors]

Notwithstanding, however, the great progress made in the improvement of the German language, it still falls considerably short of that perfection of which it is susceptible. The great Adelung, immortalized by his exertions in behalf of his native tongue, first collected, in a somewhat complete manner, the scattered treasures of the German language; and his dictionary is admitted, by all foreigners who are capable of using it, to be an astonishing performance for one individual, especially when the mass of general literature contained in it is considered. His other works on the German language are equally ex

« AnteriorContinuar »