[95]. ‘Shakspeare’s verses are not exactly “wood-notes wild.” He was indebted to a most extensive reading at the same time as to a most transcendant genius. He did not pique himself upon originality, but sat down to write his plays for the simple purpose of the moment, and without a glimpse or an ambition of the immortality which they were to acquire. He made use of whatever he recollected and thought desirable, with the contrivance of an ordinary play-writer, and only grew original and vast and exquisite, in spite of himself. If it be true that “he wrote not for an age, but for all time,” still there was no one who knew less of that fact than he! He imagined himself writing only for the day before him; and it is to this very circumstance that we owe the ease, the flashes, and the soarings of his spirit. He was never over-powered by the intended loftiness of the occasion. He made no efforts that were laborious, because his mind was always superior to his object, and never bowed down to it. He possessed, too, that affluence of genius, which rendered him not only prodigal in its use, but almost unacquainted with its existence. He never stood upon its dignity; he was never fearful of its loss nor of its denial. The swan of Avon, like the swans from which poets derive their title, was all strength and grace and beauty, without a consciousness of either. And this character of his genius accords with that character of facility, of gentleness, and of unostentation, which his biographer ascribes to the man. He knew of nothing within himself, of which he felt it worth while to be vain. He would as soon have been vain of his power to put one foot before another, as of his power to write the Tempest or Macbeth. It belongs, in the midst of abundance, to Genius as Beauty, to be thoughtless of itself. It is only for the dull and the ugly—or at least for those in whom the claims to beauty or to genius are equivocal—to be forever contemplating either in themselves, or for ever demanding the acknowledgments of others. With the plenary possessors, the luxury is too common, too much of every-day wear, to fix their attention. The restlessness of the remainder is the restlessness of poverty, and contrasts itself with the carelessness of riches.’—Kendall’s Letters on Ireland.
[96]. See a paper on this subject in the Tatler.
[97]. The same praise may be extended to Matthews. Those who have seen this ingenious and lively actor only on the stage, do not know half his merits.
[98]. See The Family Journal; a series of papers in The New Monthly Magazine, 1825, signed Harry Honeycomb (=Leigh Hunt).
[99]. The Chinese call the Americans second-chop English [Hazlitt’s Note].
[100]. For Sir Walter Scott’s share in The Beacon and its successor The Sentinel, see chapter liv. of Lockhart’s Life.
Edinburgh: Printed by T. and A. Constable
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
- P. [251], changed “uneasi-” to “uneasiness”.
- P. [469], changed “upon particular” to “upon a particular”.
- Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
- Archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as printed.
- Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers and collected together at the end of the last chapter.