ADDISON AS A CRITIC—ADDITIONAL NOTES FOR SCHOLARS AND TEACHERS

BRITISH CRITICISM DURING THE 18^th CENTURY –Blamiers

The Eighteenth Century I: The Age of Addison and Pope

M. Phil English, Bharathiar University--Blamiers—

Approaches--Unit II

Additional critical materials for students of M.Phil (English)

S.Sreekumar 

ADDISON AS A CRITIC—ADDITIONAL NOTES FOR SCHOLARS AND TEACHERS

[Teachers of MPhil classes are advised to provide additional learning materials for their scholars as the materials from the text books are not sufficient for a clear estimate of the critic concerned]

JOSEPH ADDISON (1672-1719)

Addison’s critical papers appeared mostly in the SPECTATOR.

His aim was to bring ‘philosophy out of closets and libraries, schools and colleges, to dwell in clubs and assemblies, at tea tables and in coffee houses’. Thus, Addison’s writings were not for the learned people but for the common man. This gave a new turn to English Criticism.

All the critics before Addison worried much about the writer. Addison’s thoughts were more about the reader than about the writer. This limited his criticism to a few points he thought fit for the reader to understand.

1. Wit

    Wit was a commonly misused term in 18^th century.

Dryden defined it: - “a thing well said….. a great thought dressed in words so commonly received, that it is understood by the meanest apprehensions”.

Locke said that “wit was combining similar or congruous ideas to suggest a new idea to the mind”

Addison broadly agreed to the definition given by Locke. But he added one condition to it. He said that Wit must give delight and surprise to the reader. Thus when a poet tells us that the bosom of his mistress is as white as snow, there is no wit in the comparison, but when he adds, with a sigh, that it is as cold too, it then grows into Wit. True wit therefore may be defined as the resemblance and congruity of ideas that produce delight and surprise in the reader.

False Wit generally arises from the resemblance and congruity of letters words, and the like. Anagrams and acrostics that are commonly regarded as witty are nothing more than resemblance and congruity of letters and so false wit.

Ø  An anagram is a rearrangement of the letters of a word or phrase to form a new word or phrase—‘Gustavus’ made from ‘Augustus’

Ø  An acrostic is commonly a poem in which sometimes the initial letters of lines, sometimes the final ones make words, or in which the lines begin alphabetically, or there is some other play in letters.

Ø  A pun according to Addison is a conceit arising from the use of two words that agree in the sound, but differ in the sense’. A familiar example of it is the talk between Celia and Rosalind in As You Like It. Celia who has found Orlando under a tree in the forest gives an account of him to Rosalind, who is madly in love with him:

        Celia: He was furnished like a hunter.

        Rosalind: O, ominous! He comes to kill my heart.

        Here the pun is on the word ‘heart’ which has the same sound   as the word ‘hart’ meaning ‘a stag’, the sport of hunters, which Rosalind has in her mind too.

Mixed Wit

Between these two kinds of wit Addison made a middle variety, the mixed wit, ‘which consists partly in the resemblance of ideas and partly in the resemblance of words’. Among the many examples he cites Cowley’s comparison of the cold regard of his mistress’s eyes to ‘burning- glasses made of ice’. The resemblance of ideas here lies in the comparison of the mistress’s cold looks to ice and of the love-kindling power in them to fire. But when combined the two ideas, being opposed make an image that has no foundation in the nature of things. Mixed wit is therefore a composition of pun and true wit, and is more or less perfect as the resemblance lies in the ideas or in the words.

Taste

A fine taste in literature may be defined as ‘that faculty of the soul which discerns the beauties of an author with pleasure and the imperfections with dislike’. To find out whether a person has taste, he must read the works of the ancient writers, which have stood the test of so many different ages and countries. If he finds that he cannot derive any pleasure in reading such works, he has to conclude that he has not the taste for literature. Taste is the gift of nature but it can be cultivated by reading the works of great masters.

The Pleasures of the Imagination

To Addison, imagination is the faculty of the mind which enjoys works of art for the ideas they recall of what it has seen in life. It is pleased more by what is great, strange, or beautiful—huge mountains, oddities of Nature, or her lovely sights—than by what is merely common.

On Tragedy

Addison has hardly anything new to say on tragedy, except repeating what Aristotle, Horace and the French Neo-classicists had said already. He viewed tragedy as the noblest product of human mind. The tragic hero is seen as a ‘virtuous man struggling with misfortune’. He viewed tragi-comedy as a monstrous invention. He saw that the tragic feeling is weakened by the introduction of comic scenes.

However, Addison has no objection to an under- plot if it is made to ‘bear such a near relation to the principal design as to contribute towards the completion of it. Addison also did not like the pity and fear created by violent deaths on the stage, which were simply barbarous. He felt that it was better to report such acts.

Paradise Lost

In his views on Paradise Lost, he did not advance far beyond what the neo-classicists had already said. He appreciated the fable as a single, complete and great one. It is single because it has only one purpose, to relate the Fall of Man, it is complete because it has a regular beginning, middle and end and it is great because it involves the fate not of a single person or nation, but of all mankind. Though Addison finds some blemishes following the neoclassical critics, the general verdict is one of hearty approval because the poem closely follows the classical models—the Iliad and the Aeneid.

On Criticism   

Addison believed that literary craft was more than a slavish application of the rules of the classics to all kinds of writing. He understood that rules even hampered fine writing. He also discovered more beauty in the works of a great genius who is ignorant of all the rules of art than in the works of a little genius who not only knows but scrupulously observes them. ‘Who would not read one of Shakespeare’s plays where there is not a  single rule of the stage observed than any production of a modern critic where there is  not one of them violated?’. In utterances like these he speaks exactly as he feels and shows a broader critical outlook than was common in his age.

Estimate of his Criticism

Addison’s criticism shows a dual tendency.

Ø  It is partly neo-classical—in his examination of tragedy and Paradise Lost

Ø  It is partly aesthetic—in his theory of imagination and in his utterances on the critical art.

Addison valued critical rules. But he was aware of the graces beyond the reach of classical rules.

It is sometimes stated that Addison has no depth in his criticism. This charge is very largely true for his aim was to spread critical ideas among those who had no knowledge of them and had therefore to be taught from the beginning. This can be seen from the elucidation he gives for vague terms of his day like wit, taste and imagination. It was not his plan to propound any critical theory of his own than to bring the existing ones to the understanding of the common man.

These additional materials are purely meant for the use of scholars and teachers.

Dr. S. Sreekumar