Since the first publication of Walter Harte's An Essay on Satire,
Particularly on the Dunciad,[1] it has reappeared more than once: the
unsold sheets of the first edition were included in A Collection of
Pieces in Verse and Prose, Which Have Been Publish'd on Occasion of
the Dunciad (1732), and the Essay is also found in at least three
late eighteenth- or early nineteenth-century collections of poetry.[2]
For several reasons, however, it makes sense to reprint the Essay
again. The three collections are scarce and have forbiddingly small
type; I know of no other twentieth-century reprinting; and, perhaps
most important, Aubrey Williams claims that "the critical value for
the Dunciad of Harte's poem has not been fully appreciated."[3] Its
value can best be substantiated, or disputed, if it is rescued from
its typographical limbo in the collections and reprinted from its more
attractive first edition.
Probably the immediate reason for the Essay was Harte's admiration
for Pope, which arose in part from personal gratitude. On 9 February
1727, Harte wrote an unidentified correspondent that "Mr. Pope was
pleased to correct every page" of his forthcoming Poems on Several
Occasions "with his own hand." Furthermore, Harte may have learned
that Pope had petitioned Lady Sarah Cowper, in 1728, to use her
influence to obtain him a fellowship in Exeter College, Oxford.[4]
But however appealing the Essay may be as an installment on Harte's
debt to Pope, there must obviously be better reasons for reprinting
it. Harte himself doubtless had additional reasons for writing it. To
understand them and the poem, we must also understand, at least in
broad outline, the two traditional ways of evaluating satire which
Harte and others of his age had inherited. One of them was distinctly
at odds with Harte's aims; to the other he gave his support and made
his own contribution.
One tradition stressed the "lowness" of satire, in itself and compared
with other genres. This tradition, moreover, had at least two sources:
the practice of Elizabethan satirists and the critical custom of
assigning satire to a middle or low position in the hierarchy of
genres.
From the time of Piers Plowman, it was characteristic of English
satirists "to taxe the common abuses and vice of the people in rough
and bitter speaches."[5] This native character was reenforced by the
Elizabethan assumption that there should be similarities between
satire and its supposed etymological forebears—the satyrs, legendary
half men, half goats of ancient Greece. Believing that the Roman
satirists Persius and Juvenal had imitated the uncouth manners and
vituperative diction of the satyrs, Elizabethan satirists likewise
strove to be as rough, harsh, and licentious as possible.[6] Despite
the objections to the satire-satyr etymology stated by Isaac
Casaubon,[7] scurrilous satire, especially as a political weapon, was
a recognizable subspecies in England at least to 1700. The anonymous
author, for instance, of A Satyr Against Common-Wealths (1684)
contended in his preface that it is "as disagreeable to see a Satyr
Cloath'd in soft and effeminate Language, as to see a Woman scold and
vent her self in Billingsgate Rhetorick in a gentile and
advantageous Garb." But as Harte certainly realized, The Dunciad
differed greatly from unvarnished abuse, and thus required different
standards of critical judgment.
Harte also rejected the critical habit of giving satire a relatively
low rank in the scale of literary genres. This habit can be traced to
Horace, who belittled the literary status of his own satires,[8] and
it was prominent in the Renaissance. The place of satire in a
hierarchical list of Julius Caesar Scaliger is perhaps typical: "'And
the most noble, of course, are hymns and paeans. In the second place
are songs and odes and scolia, which are concerned with the praises of
brave men. In the third place the epic, in which there are heroes and
other lesser personages. Tragedy together with comedy follows this
order; nevertheless comedy will hold the fourth place apart by itself.
After these, satires, then exodia, lusus, nuptial songs, elegies,
monodia, songs, epigrams.'"[9] Similar rankings of satire frequently
recurred in the neo-classical period,[10] as did the Renaissance supposition that each genre has a style and subject matter appropriate
to it. This supposition discouraged any "mixing" of the genres: in
Richard Blackmore's words, "all comick Manners, witty Conceits and
Ridicule" should be barred from heroic poetry.[11] The influence of
the genres theories even after Pope's death may be shown by the fact
that Pope, for the very reason that he had failed to work in the major
genres, was often ranked below such epic or tragic poets as Spenser,
Shakespeare, and Milton.[12]
One senses the foregoing critical assumptions about satire behind much
of the early comment on The Dunciad. Most of the critics, to be
sure, were anything but impartial; in many instances they were
smarting from Pope's satire and sought any critical weapons available
for retaliation. But it will not do to dismiss these men or their
responses to The Dunciad as inconsequential; they had the weight of
numbers on their side and, more important, the authority of
long-established attitudes toward satire.
Although it is frequently impossible to determine exactly which
critics Harte was answering in his Essay, brief illustration of two
prominent types of attack can indicate what he had to vindicate The
Dunciad against. One of those types resembled Blackmore's objection
to a mixing of genres. If satire should be barred from heroic poetry,
the reverse, for some critics, was also true, and Pope should not have
used epic allusions and devices in The Dunciad. Edward Ward, for
one, thought the poem an incongruous mixture "against all rule."[13]
Pope's violation of "rule" seemed almost a desecration of epic to
Thomas Cooke; of the mock-heroic games in Book II of The Dunciad, he
complained that "to imitate Virgil is not to have Games, and those
beastly and unnatural, because Virgil has noble and reasonable
Games, but to preserve a Purity of Manners, Propriety of Conduct
founded on Nature, a Beauty and Exactness of Stile, and continued
Harmony of Verse concording with the Sense."[14]
The other kind of attack accused Pope of wasting his talents in The
Dunciad, but palliated blame by reminding him of his demonstrated
ability in more worthy poetical pursuits. This was one of Ward's
resources; perhaps disingenuously, he professed amazement that a poet
with Pope's "sublime Genius," born for "an Epick Muse," "sacred
Hymns," and "heav'nly Anthems," would lower himself to mock at
"trifling Foibles" or "the Starvlings of Apollo's Train."[15] More
concerned with Pope's potentialities than with his recent ignominy,
George Lyttelton nevertheless made essentially the same point: Pope
could never become the English Virgil if he "let meaner Satire ...
stain the Glory" of his "nobler Lays."[16] And Aaron Hill wrote an
allegorical poem to show Pope the error of The Dunciad and to
suggest means of escape from entombment "in his own PROFUND."[17] In
such censure we perhaps glimpse an opinion attributable to the still
influential genres theories: a poet of "sublime Genius" should work
in a more sublime poetic genre than satire.
In opposing this low view of satire, Harte drew upon ideas more
congenial to his purposes and far more congenial to The Dunciad.
Originating with the Renaissance commentaries on the formal verse
satire of the Romans, their lineage was just as venerable as that of
the low view. These critical concepts were probably just as
influential too, for they continued to be reiterated by commentaries
down to and beyond Pope's time.
Whatever their quarrels, the Renaissance commentaries were virtually
united in regarding satire as exalted moral instruction and satirists
as ethical philosophers. Casaubon's choice for this sort of praise was
Persius; Heinsius and Stapylton likened their respective choices,
Horace and Juvenal, to Socrates and Plato; and Rigault considered all
three satirists to be philosophers, distinguished only by the
different styles which their different periods required. The satirist
might disguise himself as a jester, but only to make his moral wisdom
more easily digestible; peeling away his mask, "we find in him all the
Gods together," "Maxims or Sentences, that like the lawes of nature,
are held sacred by all Nations."[18]
Dryden's Discourse Concerning the Original and Progress of Satire
drew heavily and eclectically upon these commentaries, investing their
judgments with a new popularity and authority. Although Dryden
condemned Persius for obscurity and other defects, he agreed with
Casaubon that Persius excels as a moral philosopher and that "moral
doctrine" is more important to satire than wit or urbanity. Dryden
knew, moreover, that the satirist's inculcation of "moral doctrine"
meant a dual purpose, a pattern of blame and praise—not only "the
scourging of vice" but also "exhortation to virtue"—long recognized
as a definitive characteristic of formal verse satire.[19] But if
Dryden insisted on the moral dignity of satire, he laid equal stress
on the dignity attainable through verse and numbers. After
complimenting Boileau's Lutrin for its successful imitation of
Virgil, its blend of "the majesty of the heroic" with the "venom" of
satire, Dryden speaks of "the beautiful turns of words and thoughts,
which are as requisite in this [satire], as in heroic poetry itself,
of which the satire is undoubtedly a species"; and earlier in the
Discourse he had called heroic poetry "certainly the greatest work
of human nature."[20]
It is clear that Harte's Essay belongs in the tradition of criticism
established by the commentaries on classical satire and continued by
Dryden. Like these predecessors, Harte believes that satire is moral
philosophy, teaching "the noblest Ethicks to reform mankind" (p. 6).
Like them again, he believes that to fulfill this purpose satire must
not only lash vice but recommend virtue, at least by implication:
Blaspheming Capaneus obliquely shows
T'adore those Gods Aeneas fears and knows, (p. 10)[21]
But perhaps Harte's overriding concern was to do for satire (with The
Dunciad as his focus) what Dryden's Discourse had done: to reassert
its dignity and majesty.
Although Harte is quite careful to distinguish satire from epic
poetry, the total effect of his Essay is to blur this distinction
and to raise The Dunciad very nearly to the level of genuine epic.
The term "Epic Satire" (p. 6) certainly seems to refer to the
wedding of two disparate genres in The Dunciad, lifting it above
satire that is merely "rugged" or "mischievously gay" (p. 8). (The
epithet is also, perhaps, a thrust at Edward Ward, who had pinned it
on The Dunciad with a sneer.)[22] Harte's claim that
Books and the Man demands as much, or more,
Than He who wander'd to the Latian shore (p. 9)
has a similar effect. The greatest epic poets and satirists have
always transcended rules to follow "Nature's light"; Pope,
over-topping them all, has "still corrected Nature as she stray'd"
(pp. 19, 21). But perhaps Harte's most successful attempt to elevate
The Dunciad comes in section two of his poem. Unlike Dryden, in
whose Discourse the account of the "progress" of satire is confined
almost exclusively to a few Roman writers, Harte begins his account of
its progress with Homer and brings it down to Pope. Deriving the
ancestry of The Dunciad from Homer, the greatest epic poet,
obviously enhances Pope's satire. Perhaps less obviously, by extending
Dryden's account to the present, Harte makes The Dunciad not only a
chronological terminus ad quem but, far more important, the fruit of
centuries of slowly accumulating mastery and wisdom.
The strategies mentioned thus far constitute one series of answers to
critics who charged Pope with debasing true epic. But Harte also
addressed himself to such critics more directly. Although Aubrey
Williams (p. 54) has clearly demonstrated Harte's awareness that the
world of The Dunciad does in one sense sully epic beauties, at the
same time, I think, Harte knew that the epic poems to which The
Dunciad continually alludes remain fixed, unsullied polestars;
otherwise the reader of the poem would lack a way of measuring the
meanness of its characters and principles. The "charms of Parody" in
The Dunciad provide a contrast between its dark, fallen world and
the undimmed luster of epic realms (p. 10). By using the ambiguous
word parody, which in the eighteenth century could mean either
ridicule or straight imitation,[23] Harte skillfully suggests the
complex purpose of Pope's epic backdrop. The dunces, not Pope,
ridicule the epic world by their words and deeds; but in turn, this
world ridicules them simply by being "imitated" and incorporated in
The Dunciad. And its incorporation is by no means equivalent to the
pollution of epic. That, Harte hints, is the achievement of scribblers
like Blackmore (p. 12). It is they who inadvertently write mock-epics,
parodies which degrade their great models; Pope, nominally writing
mock-epic, actually approaches epic achievement.
Harte's reply to those who believed Pope had wasted his talent in
attacking "the Refuse of the Town" centers in the stanza beginning on
p. 24 but can be found elsewhere as well. Literary "Refuse," he
realized, could not safely be ignored, for he at least came close to
understanding that it was "the metaphor by which bigger
deteriorations," social and moral, "are revealed" (Williams, p. 14).
... Rules, and Truth, and Order, Dunces strike;
Of Arts, and Virtues, enemies alike. (p. 24)
Ultimately, then, Harte seemed aware that the dunces pose a colossal
threat, a threat which warrants Pope's numerous echoes of Paradise
Lost. Harte's Essay, in fact, contains several echoes of the same
poem. Though, like most of Pope's, these Miltonic echoes are given a
comic turn which indicates a wide gap between the real satanic host
and its London auxiliary, there is little doubt that Harte grasped the
underlying seriousness of his mentor's analogies and his own.
A few words remain to be said about Boileau's Discourse of Satires
Arraigning Persons by Name, which so far as I know appeared with all
early printings of Harte's Essay.
The Discourse was first published in 1668, with the separately
printed edition of Boileau's ninth satire; in the same year it was
included in a collected edition of the satires. It was occasioned,
evidently, by a critic's complaint that the modern satirist, departing
from ancient practice, "offers insults to individuals."[24]
The only English translation of the Discourse that I have discovered
before 1730 appears in volume two (1711) of a three-volume translation
of Boileau's works. This, however, is not the same translation as the
one accompanying Harte's Essay; it is noticeably less fluent and
lacks (as does the French) the subtitle "arraigning persons by name."
The 1730 translation is faithful to the original, and the subtitle
calls attention to the aptness of the Discourse as a defense of
Pope's satiric practice.[25] It is so apt, indeed, that one could
almost suspect Pope himself of making the translation and submitting
it to Harte or his publisher. Pope had already invoked Boileau's name
and precedent in the letter from "William Cleland"; nothing could be
more logical than for Pope to turn the esteemed Boileau's
self-justification to his own ends.
Cornell College
[1] Robert W. Rogers, The Major Satires of Alexander Pope, Illinois
Studies in Language and Literature, XL (Urbana, 1955), p. 140, dates
the Essay January 7-14, 1731, N. S., on the evidence of The
Grub-Street Journal; No. 484 of The London Evening-Post (Saturday,
January 9, to Tuesday, January 12, 1731) advertises its publication
for the following day.
[2] Rogers, p. 141. Thomas Park, Supplement to the British Poets
(London, 1809), VIII, 21-36; Alexander Chalmers, The Works of the
English Poets (London, 1810), XVI, 348-352; Robert Anderson, A
Complete Edition of the Poets of Great Britain (London, 1794), IX,
825-982 [sic].
[3] Pope's "Dunciad": A Study of Its Meaning (Baton Rouge, 1955), p. 54n.
[4] The Correspondence of Alexander Pope, ed. George Sherburn
(Oxford, 1956), II, 430 n., 497.
[5] George Puttenham, The Arte of English Poesie (1589), in
Elizabethan Critical Essays, ed. G. Gregory Smith (Oxford, 1904),
II, 27.
[6] Alvin Kernan, The Cankered Muse: Satire of the English
Renaissance, Yale Studies in English, CXLII (New Haven, 1959), pp.
55, 58, 62; Oscar James Campbell, Comicall Satyre and Shakespeare's
"Troilus and Cressida" (San Marino, 1959), pp. 24-25, 27, 29-30.
[7] De Satyrica Graecorum Poesi, & Romanorum Satira Libri Duo
(Paris, 1605).
[8] J. F. D'Alton, Roman Literary Theory and Criticism: A Study in
Tendencies (London, New York, and Toronto, 1931), pp. 356, 414 and
n.; George Converse Fiske, Lucilius and Horace: A Study in the
Classical Theory of Imitation, University of Wisconsin Studies in
Language and Literature, No. 7 (Madison, 1920), p. 443.
[9] Bernard Weinberg, A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian
Renaissance (Chicago, 1961), II, 745. For similar appraisals of
satire, see also I, 148-149; II, 759, 807; and Puttenham, pp. 26-28.
[10] E.g., John Dennis, "The Grounds of Criticism in Poetry" (1704),
in The Critical Works, ed. Edward Niles Hooker (Baltimore,
1939-1943), I, 338; Joseph Trapp, Lectures on Poetry Read in the
Schools of Natural Philsophy at Oxford (London, 1742), p. 153.
[11] Essays upon Several Subjects (London, 1716-1717), I, 76.
[12] Paul F. Leedy, "Genres Criticism and the Significance of Warton's
Essay on Pope," JEGP, XLV (1946), 141.
[13] Durgen. Or, A Plain Satyr upon a Pompous Satyrist (London,
1729), p. 48.
[14] "The Battel of the Poets," in Tales, Epistles, Odes, Fables,
etc. (London, 1729), p. 138n. Though the poem was first published in
1725, it was revised to attack The Dunciad; Cooke claims ("The
Preface," p. 107) that not more than eighty lines in the two versions
are the same.
[15] Durgen, pp. [i], 19, 40-41.
[16] An Epistle to Mr. Pope, from a Young Gentleman at Rome (London,
1730), pp. 6-7.
[17] The Progress of Wit (London, 1730), p. 31. Two months after
Harte's Essay appeared Hill's Advice to the Poets, which complements
the earlier allegory by urging Pope to shun "vulgar Genii" and
emulate "Thy own Ulysses" (pp. 18-19).
[18] Daniel Heinsius, "De Satyra Horatiana Liber," in Q. Horati
Flacci Opera (1612), pp. 137-138; Sir Robert Stapylton, "The Life and
Character of Juvenal," in Mores Hominum. The Manners of Men,
Described in Sixteen Satyrs, by Juvenal (London, 1660), p. [v];
Nicolas Rigault, "De Satira Juvenalis Dissertatio" (1615), in Decii
Junii Juvenalis Satirarum Libri Quinque (Paris, 1754), p. xxv; and
André Dacier, An Essay upon Satyr (London, 1695), p. 273.
[19] Essays of John Dryden, ed. W. P. Ker (Oxford, 1900), II, 75,
104-105; Howard D. Weinbrot, "The Pattern of Formal Verse Satire in
the Restoration and the Eighteenth Century," PMLA, LXXX (1965),
394-401; Causaubon, De Satyrica Graecorum Poesi, & Romanorum Satira
Libri Duo, pp. 291-292; Heinsius, pp. 137-138.
[20] Essays, II, 43, 107-108.
[21] See Weinbrot, p. 399.
[22] Durgen, p. 3.
[23] Howard D. Weinbrot, "Parody as Imitation in the 18th Century,"
AN&Q, II (1964), 131-134.
[24] Boileau, Oeuvres Complètes, ed. Françoise Escal (Éditions
Gallimard, 1966), p. 924.
[25] Numerous protests against Pope's use of names made such a defense
desirable. See, for example, Ward (p. 9) and "A Letter to a Noble
Lord: Occasion'd by the Late Publication of the Dunciad Variorum," in
Pope Alexander's Supremacy and Infallibility Examin'd (London,
1729), p. 12. Boileau's Discourse is a particularly apposite reply
to the latter, which had contrasted Pope's satiric practice with that
of Horace, Juvenal, and Boileau.
| BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE |
| |
| The text of this edition is reproduced from a copy in the University
of Illinois Library. |