baronet's mind, afpect, manner, and eloquence, (if we except the farcaftic term juftly, the double fenfe of the word open'd, and the fine irony couched in the reply) is purely facetious. An inftance of wit and humour combined, where they reciprocally fet off and enliven each other, Pope hath alfo furnished us with in another part of the fame exquifite performance. Whether the nymph shall break Diana's law, Or fome frail china jar receive a flaw; Or whether heaven has doom'd that Shock must fall †. This is humorous, in that it is a lively sketch of the female eftimate of mifchances, as our poet's commentator rightly terms it, marked out by a few ftriking lineaments. It is likewife witty, for, not to mention the play on words like that remarked in the former example, a trope familiar to this author, you have here a comparifon of a woman's chastity to a piece of porcelain, her honour to a gaudy robe,—her prayers to a fantastical disguise,—her heart to a trinket; and all thefe together to her lap-dog, and that founded on one lucky circumftance (a malicious VOL. I. + Rape of the Lock, Canto 2. F critic critic would perhaps difcern or imagine more) by which these things, how unlike foever in other refpects, may be compared, the impreffion they make on the mind of a fine lady. HUDIBRAS, fo often above quoted, abounds in wit in almost all its varieties; to which the author's various erudition hath not a little contributed. And this, it must be owned, is more fuitable to the nature of his poem. At the fame time it is by no means deftitute of humour, as appears particularly in the different exhibitions of character given by the knight and his fquire. But in no part of the ftory is this talent displayed to greater advantage than in the confultation of the lawyer, to which I fhall refer the reader, as the paffage is too long for my transcribing. There is, perhaps, no book in any language wherein the humorous is carried to a higher pitch of perfection, than in the adventures of the celebrated knight of La Mancha. As to our English dramatifts, who does not acknowledge the tranfcendent excellence of Shakespeare in this province, as well as in the pathetic? Of the later comic writers, Congreve has an exuterance of wit, but Farquhar has more humour. * Part III. Canto 3. It may, however, with too much truth, be affirmed of English comedy in general, (for there are fome exceptions) that, to the difcredit of our stage, as well as of the national delicacy and difcernment, obfcenity is made too often to fupply the place of wit, and ribaldry the place of humour. WIT and humour, as above explained, commonly concur in a tendency to provoke laughter, by exhibiting a curious and unexpected affinity; the firft generally by comparison, either direct or implied, the fecond by connecting in fome other relation, fuch as caufality or vicinity, objects apparently the most diffimilar and heterogeneous; which incongruous affinity, we may remark by the way, gives the true meaning of the word oddity, and is the proper object of laughter.. THE difference between thefe and that grander kind of eloquence treated in the first part of this chapter, I fhall, if poffible, ftill farther illuftrate, by a few fimilitudes borrowed from the optical science. The latter may be conceived as a plain mirrour, which faithfully reflects the object, in colour, figure, fize, and posture. Wit, on the contrary, Proteus-like, transforms itself into a variety of fhapes. It is now a convex fpeculum, which gives a juft representation in form and colour, but withal reduces the greatest objects to the most despicable littleness; now a concave fpeculum, which fwells the fmalleft trifles to an enormous magnitude; now again a speculum of a cylindrical, a conical, or an irregular make, which, though in colour, and even in attitude, it reflects a pretty strong refemblance, widely varies the proportions. Humour, when we confider the contrariety of its effects,contempt and laughter, (which conftitute what in one word is termed derifion) to that fympathy and love often produced by the pathetic, may in refpect of these be aptly compared to a concave mirrour, when the object is placed beyond the focus; in which case it appears by reflection, both diminished and inverted, circumstances which happily adumbrate the contemptible and the ridiculous. SECTION HI. Of ridicule. THE intention of raifing a laugh is either merely to divert by that grateful titillation which it excites, or to influence the opinions and purposes of the hearers. In this alfo, the rifible faculty, when fuitably directed, hath often prov ed ed a very potent engine. When this is the view of the speaker, as there is always an air of reafoning conveyed under that fpecies of imagery, narration or defcription, which ftimulates laughter, thefe, thus blended, obtain the appellation of ridicule, the poignancy of which hath a fimilar effect in futile fubjects, to that produced by what is called the vehement in folemn and important matters. NOR doth all the difference between these lie in the dignity of the fubject. Ridicule is not only confined to queftions of less moment, but is fitter for refuting error than for fupporting truth, for reftraining from wrong conduct, than for inciting to the practice of what is right. Nor are these the fole reftrictions; it is not properly levelled at the falfe, but at the abfurd in tenets; nor can the edge of ridicule ftrike with equal force every fpecies of mifconduct: it is not the criminal part which it attacks, but that which we denominate filly or foolish. With regard to doctrine, it is evident that it is not falfity or mistake, but palpable error or abfurdity, (a thing hardly confutable by mere argument) which is the object of contempt; and confequently those dogmas are beyond the reach |