THE LATER NINETEENTH CENTURY.
CHAPTER I.
THE SUCCESSORS OF SAINTE-BEUVE.
| Ordonnance of this chapter | [431] |
| Philarète Chasles | [432] |
| Barbey d’Aurévilly | [433] |
| On Hugo | [434] |
| On others | [435] |
| Strong redeeming points in him | [436] |
| Doudan | [436] |
| Interest of his general attitude | [437] |
| And particular utterances | [437] |
| Renan | [439] |
| Taine | [440] |
| His culpa | [440] |
| His miscellaneous critical work | [441] |
| His Histoire de la Littérature Anglaise | [442] |
| Its shortcomings | [443] |
| Instances of them | [443] |
| Moutégut: his peculiarities | [444] |
| Delicacy and range of his work | [446] |
| Scherer: peculiar moral character of his criticism | [447] |
| Its consequent limitations | [448] |
| The solid merits accompanying them | [448] |
| Sainte-Beuve + Gautier | [450] |
| Banville | [450] |
| Saint-Victor | [451] |
| Baudelaire | [452] |
| Crépet’s Les Poètes Français | [453] |
| Flaubert: the “Single Word” | [454] |
| “Naturalism” | [454] |
| Zola | [455] |
| Le Roman Experimental | [456] |
| Examples of his criticism | [456] |
| The reasons of his critical incompetency | [458] |
| “Les Deux Goncourt” | [458] |
| “Scientific criticism”: Hennequin | [459] |
| “Comparative Literature”: Texte | [462] |
| Academic Criticism: Gaston Paris | [464] |
| Caro, Taillandier, &c. | [465] |
| The “Light Horsemen”: Janin | [466] |
| Pontmartin | [467] |
| Veuillot | [468] |
| Not so black as, &c. | [469] |
| The present | [469] |
CHAPTER II.
BETWEEN COLERIDGE AND ARNOLD.
| The English Critics of 1830-60 | [472] |
| Wilson | [472] |
| Strange medley of his criticism | [473] |
| The Homer and the other larger critical collections | [473] |
| The Spenser | [474] |
| The Specimens of British Critics | [475] |
| Dies Boreales | [476] |
| Faults in all | [476] |
| And in the republished work | [477] |
| De Quincey: his anomalies | [478] |
| And perversities as a critic | [479] |
| In regard to all literatures | [480] |
| Their causes | [480] |
| The Rhetoric and the Style | [481] |
| His compensations | [482] |
| Lockhart | [483] |
| Difficulty of appraising his criticism | [483] |
| The Tennyson review | [483] |
| On Coleridge, Burns, Scott, and Hook | [484] |
| His general critical character | [485] |
| Hartley Coleridge | [485] |
| Forlorn condition of his criticism | [485] |
| Its quality | [486] |
| Defects | [486] |
| And examples | [487] |
| Maginn | [487] |
| His parody-criticisms | [488] |
| And more serious efforts | [488] |
| Macaulay | [490] |
| His exceptional competence in some ways | [490] |
| The early articles | [490] |
| His drawbacks | [490] |
| The practical choking of the good seed | [491] |
| His literary surveys in the Letters | [492] |
| His confession | [493] |
| The Essays | [493] |
| Similar dwindling in Carlyle | [495] |
| The earlier Essays | [497] |
| The later | [497] |
| The attitude of the Latter-day Pamphlets | [498] |
| The conclusion of this matter | [499] |
| Thackeray | [500] |
| His one critical weakness | [500] |
| And excellence | [501] |
| Blackwood in 1849 on Tennyson | [502] |
| George Brimley | [504] |
| His Essay on Tennyson | [505] |
| His other work | [507] |
| His intrinsic and chronological importance | [508] |
| “Gyas and Cloanthus” | [508] |
| Milman, Croker, Hayward | [509] |
| Sydney Smith, Senior, Helps | [509] |
| Elwin, Lancaster, Hannay | [510] |
| Dallas | [511] |
| The Poetics | [511] |
| The Gay Science | [512] |
| Others: J. S. Mill | [514] |
CHAPTER III.