A Brief History of the Criticism of Dr. Johnson

Citation preview

A BRIEF HISTORY OF

t>y

Robert Nelson Lass

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of hoctor of Philosophy In the Department of English, In the graduate College of the ht&te University of Iowa July, 1942

ProQuest Number: 10831768

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon the quality of the copy subm itted. In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u thor did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved, a n o te will ind ica te the deletion.

uest ProQuest 10831768 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C opyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346

7

L3 4 Co V tN ■1' \

CONTENTS

Chapter I II III

Page Johnson In His

Own Day . . . . . . .

Johnson in the Nineteenth Century Johnson Today

............ . . . . .

1 • 28 59

F o o t n o t e s ............................. 77 Bibliography . . . . . .

. . . . . .

86

1

I In his own day Johnson acquired unique literary celebrity*

Eis literary Judgments were solicited alike

b y the King and Bet Flint, were heeded by the denizens of Grub Street and repeated by the ladies of baa bleu society* By authors he was waited on as a kind of critical oracle; by men of eminence in other professions he was no less valued for his opinions*

With the literary career of vir­

tually all the English writers of the day, he had some contact.

He delighted Little Burney by repeating from

memory pages of Evelina and defied the rage of Macx>herson with a letter of unmistakable clarity and an oak cudgel of respectable size*

He rescued the penniless Goldsmith

from the durance of an irate landlady and scorned the be ­ lated overtures of Lord Chesterfield* Upon, a great number of people Johnson, man and author, made an impression*

By peculiarities in dress and

manner he attracted the attention of passersby.

His

friends, with an opportunity of observing these peculiari­ ties more intimately, and struck by his conversation, re­ corded an unprecedented quantity of personalia and remarks* By his compositions he aroused critics and reviewers*

The

Monthly Review acknowledged him as a critic and biographer without a rival*

Pope heralded the anonymous author of

London as a poet who would soon be doterre>

Hannah More

endorsed the Rambler as a preceptor of undevlating moral

2

purity and invariable delicacy*

If, at times, this

criticism was unfavorable and Johnson was attacked as a trifler, a literary Cossack, a babbling old woman, or a Tory with no ear for poetry, such comment likewise at­ tests a lively Interest In him*

The controversy over

Johnsonian style— a style that was variously represented as vicious and composed of teeth-breaklng diction, or lauded for Its harmony and splendour— is yet another re­ flection of interest In him*

And, at his death, he was

proclaimed by numerous biographies and essays*

These

reached a climax In Boswell’s Lif e , a work which has im­ mortalized the most familiar figure of the eighteenth century* Accompanying, and In a way- increasing,

the acclaim

of Johnson as a writer was his reputation for peculiarity of appearance and eccentricity of habit* details recorded of his life:

Infinite are the

his solicitude for Hodge;

his distress at the prospect of eternal damnation; his dilatorlneas In composition; his curious propensity for hoarding orange peels;

”his tumultuous and awkward fondness”

for Tetty— a wife of twice his years, heavily painted and fantastically dressed; his amazing verbal memory; his in­ terest in ghosts;' his hatred of cant; his disordercd apparel and burnt wigs; his large-hearted and very personal charity; his voracity in drinking twenty-five cups of tea at a sitting or in eating seven or eight peaches before breakfast*

Perhaps under some kind of fascination,

certainly

3

wl th coramendable thoroughness, Johnson*s biographers chron­ icled the little acts and traits that have individualized him for posterity, noting down In detail what he wore, what he ate, what he did, what he said*

Obviously, personal

peculiarities are not, in themselves, literary attributes, but they did help to keep people talking about Johnson. What his literary reputation would have been without them, it is impossible to say. Hie quantity of creditable biographical material on Johnson indicates that his contemporaries considered him intrinsically interesting and really important*

In addition

to the relatively ?/ell known accounts of Mrs* Ploszi (178G), Sir John Hawkins (1787), and James Boswell (1791), there were lives or biographical essays by Thomas Tyers (1784), William Cooke (1785), the Reverend William Shaw (1785), Joseph Towers (1786), Arthur Murphy (1792), Robert Anderson (1795), and a number of others*

Moreover, in the diaries,

memoirs, and correspondence of th© day there are innumerable leaser comments on Johnson*

Material from almost forty

such sources Is collected in H i l l ’s Johnsonian Miscellanies * Horace Walpole, Bishop Percy, Hannah More, Fanny Burney, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, and Adam Smith were among those who recorded facts about Johnson.

This biographical material

has a certain pertinence in a history of the criticism of Johnson, not only because of the assistance lent to his literary reputation by non-llterary factors, but for an

additional reason* Whereas Johnson was, to an unparalleled degree, a speaking as well a s a writing "author," biograxchical accounts, In so far as they record his oral pronouncements on men and books, are peculiarly necessary as a supplement to his own compositions.

In considering his reputation as

an author, certainly In considering his reputation as a critic, recognition must be given to this conversational "literature."

The judgments he made thus, often in the

heat of controversy, contributed In a large degree to his literary fame.

Relying on an amazing memory and wide If

desultory reading, and expressing himself with rare skill, he said things better than most men write them, better, in the opinion of some, than he himself could write them.

Be­

cause of this felicity, because of his recognized position as a literary dictator, and perhaps further because of the nature of the circle in which he talked,

these pronounce­

ments got an unusual hearing. In her Anecdotes Mrs. Plozzi recorded numerous literary judgments by Johnson, many of which were borne out in his writing.

She mentions his praise of P o p o ’s

Shakespeare (the little fellow has done wonders), his rever­ ence for Dryden, his preference for Shakespeare over Cornell (the one likened to a forest,

the other to a clipped hedge),

his opinion tuat Steele*s essays were too "thin" to satisfy an Englishmanfs taste, his criticism that Richardson got at

the kernel of life while Fielding was content with the husk, his affection for Bon Quixote, Robinson Crusoe, Pilgrim’s Progress,

the Iliad, his delight In Boileau

and La Rochefoucauld* But Boswell, more than any other, was the one who garnered tirelessly Johnson’s conversational literary criticism and '‘comment, reporting it with unrivaled skill. It is in Boswell’s Life that on© learns of the only book that ever took Johnson out of bed two hours sooner than he wished to rise, here the Richardson vs. Pielalm . con­ troversy is rehearsed, here too one listens to Johnson attack Swift, praise Burke,

condemn Rousseau to the plan­

tations, and teaso Goldsmith.

There seem to be few writers

on whom Johnson did not deliver his dictumj a half h o u r ’s reading anywhere in Boswell will make clear how much liter­ ary matters provide the subject for Johnson’s talk, Johnson’s life, as h r s . Plozzi remarked, else than talk.)

(And

consisted in little

The unusual effect of this talk--the fame

It achieved and the extent to which It was repeated— must be placed alongside the formal criticism in order to get a com­ plete notion of his literary status in his own day. Although personal eccentricity and conversational brilliance did contribute to his literary reputation, Johnson was unquestionably recognized as a writer of inportanco by eighteenth century standards.

Indications of this contempor­

ary opinion are apparent within the biographies themselves.

6

Joseph Towers maintained that the Doctor's works, defects notwithstanding, were "a most valuable and important ac­ cession to zhe literature of England," entitling Johnson to a distinguished rank among the ablest of English writers.1 Boswell,

too, is habitually respectful of Johnson as a

writer, celebrating the Vanity of Human dishes as ethic poetry th© equal of that in any language, pointing out that Hasselas was translated into most of the modern languages and was known throughout Europe— and that he himself read it once a year— and declaring that the Lives of the Poets filled the world with admiration#^

Arthur

Murphy wrote that by the time Johnson was forty his '‘name broke out upon mankind with a degree of lustre that promised a triumph over all his difficulties#"3

Robert Anderson, in

his turn, maintained that "the depth, force, eloquence, and moral purity and originality of his (Johnson's) writings" would Insure a lasting reputation for him as long as the English language endured. Additional indications of the contemporary opinion of Johnson as a writer may be discovered in a variety of sonx’ces#

There is bhe account, for example, of dir Joshua

Reynolds1 starting to read the Life of Savage as he stood leaning with one arm on the mantelpiece and of Lis continu­ ing to read until he had finished the book,by which time his arm was totally benumbed.

Fanny Burneyfs adulation and Imi­

tation is further tribute to Johnson as a writer# is Pope's attempt to discover the author of London.

Lo also Th©

Monthly Review added to this testimony when it declared that Johnson was, at the time he received his pension, "one of the highest literary ornaments of his majesty's reign.Then

too, the writing Johnson must he included

in such general appraisals as that of Malone to the effect that Johnson was the greatest ornament of the eighteenth century. Johnson, as a writer, was praised on several grounds.

One aspect frequently emphasised by his contempora

ries, and now usually depreciated, was the value of his compositions for moral instruction.

Typical of tlxis atti­

tude are the remarks of Hannah More In her book, Hints towards Forming the Character of & foung Princess (1Q05)• "Of all the periodical works," she writes,

"those of Johnson

in point of strict and undeviating moral purity, unquestion­ ably stand highest." explains,

Th© purity of his pages is such, she

that any of his works may be placed In the hands

of a female pupil without any fear that she will stumble upon a pernicious sentiment or receive the slightest taint of immorality.6

Kassolas» too, Is peculiarly adapted to

th© royal pupil, for, although its picture of life is too dark, it does "afford excellent occasions for the sagacious preceptor to unfold,

throw h what pursuits life may be made

happy by being made useful; by v/hat superinduce^ strength the burdens of this mortal state may be cheerfully borne, and by what a glorious perspective its termination may be brightened.Comparable

to this recommendation of

8

Johnsonian purity Is the opinion of dir Joshua Reynolds that th© Doctor*© writing and conduct wero devoted to the promotion of virtue and piety, that in his compositions "not a line can be found which a saint could wish to blot.”® Others, too, commented on the moral aspect of Johnson’s productions*

Murphy pointed out that the Haiabler

was Johnson’s great work, a bod y of ethics containing acute ana instructive observations, and the basis for his high reputation.^

Hawkins, discussing the same work, remarked

that its merits were not those to recommend. It to that numerous class who read only for pleasure,

Concerning it­

self with the most weighty of subjects, it directed attention to eternal rather than temporal h a p p i n e s s B o s w e l l ,

what­

ever his own moral lapses may have been, was nevertheless cognizant of the virtue Johnson sought to inculcate in his writings,

This biographer Insists that in the Dictionary

no work was quoted that could have "a tendency to hurt sound religion and m o r a l ! t y . " ^

jtc also emphasizes the moral value

of IIass©las, declaring that "almost every sentence of it may furnish a subject of long meditation."

(Bo appends a coimacnt

that Johnson’s view of life was probably too gloomy, certainly he (Boswell) had had Johnson,)^

that

ore enjoyment from life than

That Johnson wrote wish a moral purpose is fur­

ther suggested by a critic in the Monthly Review who comments while reviewing the Life of taller, that Johnson was ever ■"sensible that biography ought to be 'a lflwson of v i r t u e . " ^ (To this comment might be added Johnson *s frequently o'-,pressed

3

fondness for biography and his stressing of its didactic value#)

Such testimony as to Jolinsonfs importance as a

moral teacher might be multiplied indefinitely. Johnson was also, for his contemporaries, a poet of distinction#

The aforementioned incident of Pope*s

inquiry after the anonymous author of London and his pre­ diction that he would soon be deterre indicates the recep­ tion accorded Johnson*s poetry#

The report of the Reverend

Dr. Douglas, as recorded by Boswell, corroborates the fact that Johnson1s verse was enthusiastically received*

Douglas

said that when London was produced, while he was a student at Oxford, everybody was delighted with it and literary circles buzzed with comment on this unknown poot greater than P o p e B o s w e l l

himself applauded the poem as the

first display of Johnson*s transcendent powers, a work of splendour that eclipsed the attempts of Bolleau and Oldham to imitate the same satire#

For sentiment anu expression

he commends it as one of the noblest productions in the language.^

His praise of the Vanity of Human Wishes is

equally high.^-6

Murphy gave it as his opinion that if

Johnson had devoted himself to poetry he might have rivaled Pope.

He praised Johnson for catching the spirit of

Juvenal and for skillfully polishing his numbers.

He

thought Johnsonfs imitation of Juvenal1s tenth Satire nearer the spirit of the original than D r y d c n ’s imitation of the same satire Additional eulogy of Johnson the poet appears in

10

letters and memoirs*

Hannah M o r e ’s opinion is indicated in

one of her letters that refers to the "admirable imitations of Juvenal*n*8

Sir Nathaniel W, Wraxall in his Memoirs

regrets that one who could write such poems as London and the Vanity of Human Wishes should have written so seldom* P o p e ’s imitations of Horace, he says, have more sixavity and taste than Johnson’s imitations of Juvenal, hut the Juvenal iiaitations breathe a spirit of "sublime morality” and "philo­ sophic grandeur” axid are as captivating and instructive as P o p e ’s productions*

The portraits of Charles XII and Wolsey

are singled out for commendation*

The verse is praised for

being "chaste,” "correct,” "harmonious," and free from pedantry.Further

praise of Johnson in comparison with

Pop© comes from a critic in the Monthly Review who writes that the whole of the Vanity of Human Wishes "is in a style that rivals the vigour and harmony of Pope*"^0

On another

occasion this same Review suggests that, although the quantity of Johnson’s verse Is limited, its quality has always obtained the esteem of the fee3t j u d g e s . T h a t

Johnson, In competition

with such a poet as Pope, could still receive considerable recognition suggests his prominence as a poet* The stylistic traits of Johnson’s writings have always intorested critics*

Goldsmith’s remark that if Johnson

were to write a fable about little fishes he would make them talk like whales Illustrates what many of Johnson’s contempo­ raries thought of his style.

His manner was taken up In

parody and serious Imitation, exhibited in Beauties and

beforr.ilties, and. ridiculed arid eulogised in critical dis­ cussions*

Witli equal vigor supporters and hostile critics

enforced their claims. Reynolds22

The accusations that V i . Vaughn

recites from eighteenth century writers ranging

from forgotten critics to the splenetic Walpole pretty well indicate one side of the contemporary controversy* catalogue of flaws is an exhaustive one:

The

excessive Latin-

isms, high, sounding words, florid allusions, quaint anti­ theses, fanatical precision of expression, hard words, ab­ surd phraseology, pomposity, foreign'words, six syllable words, obscurity, Inversions, licentious constructions, an unsuccessful endeavour to achieve splendour and harmony, monotonous parallelisms,

absurd bombast,

toeth-breaking

diction, crabbed phrases, and vulgarisms* Among the hostile critics, Horace Walpole Is most violent in hia denunciation*

He reverts to the fustian and

tautology of Johnsonese in many of his letters#2^

Iho viru­

lence of his dislike Is collected together In his essay, ”General Criticisms of Dr. Johnson’s Writings*"24

Herein he

cautions young authors, notwithstanding the brilliance of Johnson's reputation, against his "encumbered" style, a style "void of ear and harmony*"

This "uncommonly viclous"

manner, he insists, is mad© up of exuberance and affecta­ tion, loaded with vjords "indiscriminately select, and too forceful for ordinary occasions*"

He complains that Johnson

"illustrates till he fatigues, and continues to prove, after he has convinced*"

He further condemns him for his preference

12

for learned words instead of simple and cor-mion terns, for his "laboured coinage of nords," and for his triptology, a "threefold inundation of synonymous expressIons." The enconiums on Johnson!s stylo wore neither less numerous nor less enthusiastic than the denunciations. The opinions in support of Johnson introduced by Reynolds indicate this#

Johnson*s supporters discover a variety of

ways to laud his stylistic traits, praising him forj

great­

ness of thought behind the big words, harmony and splendour, strength and elegance, admirable language, highly polished periods, originality, bold inversions, sonorous periods, comprehension o f ,mind as a mould for grand language, dignity, energy, correctness, precision in word choice, a large and favorable influence on the style of other writers#25

That

some readers thought Johnson’s stylo worthy of serious imi­ tation is apparent in H a w kins’ statement that there were popular orators who memorized whole essays from the Rambler in the endeavour to improve their own s t y l e # ^

'Murphy, too,

in the course of his fasay on . . . Johnson commends his lofty style a number of times,' and in conclusion recommends, with due precautions, his writings to those authors who wish to learn "to grace their style with elegance, harmony, and precision," and "to think with vigour and

p e r s p i c u i t y .

"27

The discussion of Johnsonian style might be greatly expanded#

The critics cited by Reynolds are further con­

sidered in Chapter IX of The Prose Style of Samuel Johnson by h# Km Wimsdtt,

Jr#2B

mp0 comments of several of those critics

are amplified and additional comments from eighteenth century sources introduced#

Besides these more or less extended

criticisms there were, bimsatt says, casual objections and casual praises of Johnson’s style, during his life and for awhile after it, In too great a number to be taken account of#

Numerous,

too, were the imitations— admitted ana denied,

serious and ridiculous, successful, and unsuccessful.

These

Imitations were attempted by Johnson’s close friends, by a number of literary women with whom he associated, by many outside of his circle, unwittingly by some of his harshest critics#

As for Johnson’s influence on English prose, some

contended that it had been considerable, but others thought it negligible.

Discussions, imitations, and parodies con­

tinued beyond the eighteenth century, some of them even to the present. Whatever the preoccupation with the eccentricities of Johnson,

the attention .to his conversation, or the inter­

est In him as moralist, poet and stylist, his literary reputa­ tion nevertheless rested in part on his criticism and biogra­ phy*

His status as a critic was, of course, attained partly

as the result of his oral criticisms which are celebrated throughout Boswell and to a lesser extent In the work of Mrs# Piozzi and others.

The comments on his written criti­

cism, however, are numerous and widely different in tone and method.

The literary ladies of the day sought out Johnson

not only because

friendship with him or his pres'nee as a

gUQ„t lent distinction, but also because they appreciated his

critical abilities,

They listened eagerly to whct