Mr. POPE's PREFACE T is not my defign to enter into a Criticifm upon this Author; tho' to do it effectually and not fuperficially, would be the best occafion that any juft Writer could take, to form the judgment and taste of our nation. For of all English Poets ShakeSpear must be confeffed to be the fairest and fulleft fubject for Criticism, and to afford the most numerous, as well as moft confpicuous inftances, both of Beauties and Faults of all forts. But this far exceeds the bounds of a Preface, the business of which is only to give an account of the fate of his Works, and the disadvantages under which they have been tranfmitted to us. We fhall hereby extenuate many faults which are his, and clear him from the imputation of many which are not: A defign, which tho' it can be no guide to future Criticks to do him juftice in one way, will at least be fufficient to prevent their doing him an injuftice in the other. I cannot however but mention fome of his principal and characteristic Excellencies, for which (notwithstanding his defects) he is justly and univerfally ele vated above all other Dramatick Writers. Not that this is the proper place of praising him, but because I would not omit any occafion of doing it. If ever any Author deferved the name of an Original, it was Shakespear. Homer himself drew not his art fo immediately from the fountains of Nature, it proceeded thro' Ægyptian strainers and channels, and came to him not without fome tincture of the learning, or fome caft of the models, of those before him. The Poetry of Shakespear was Infpiration indeed: he is not fo much an Imitator, as an Inftrument, of Nature; and 'tis not fo juft to fay that he speaks from her, as that she speaks thro' him. His Characters are fo much Nature herself, that 'tis a fort of injury to call them by fo diftant a name as Copies of her. Thofe of other Poets have a conftant resemblance, which fhews that they receiv'd them from one another, and were but multipliers of the fame image: each picture like a mock-rainbow is but the reflexion of a reflexion. But every fingle character in Shakespear is as much an Individual, as those in Life it felf; it is as impoffible to find any two alike; and fuch as from their relation or affinity in any refpect appear most to be twins, will upon comparison be found remarkably diftinct. To this life and variety of Character, we must add the wonderful prefervation of it; which is fuch throughout his Plays, that had all the Speeches been printed without the very names of the Perfons, I believe one might have apply'd them with certainty to every speaker. The Power over our Paffions was never poffefs'd in a more eminent degree, or difplay'd in fo different inftances. Yet all along, there is feen no labour, no pains to raise them; no preparation to guide our guefs to the effect, or be perceiv'd to lead toward it: But the heart fwells, and the tears burit out, juft at the proper places: We are furpriz'd the moment we weep; weep; and yet upon How aftonishing is it again, that the Paffions di- Nor does he only excel in the Paffions: In the coolnefs of Reflection and Reasoning he is full as admirable. His Sentiments are not only in general the moft pertinent and judicious upon every fubject; but by talent very peculiar, fomething between Penetration and Felicity, he hits upon that particular point on which the bent of each argument turns, or the force of each motive depends. This is perfectly amazing, from a Man of no education or experience in thofe great and publick scenes of life which are usually the fubject of his thoughts: So that he feems to have known the world by Intuition, to have look'd thro' human nature at one glance, and to be the only Author that gives ground for a very new opinion, That the Philofopher and even the Man of the world, may be Born, as well as the Poet. It must be own'd that with all these great excellencies, he has almost as great defects; and that as he has certainly written better, fo he has perhaps written worse, than any other. But I think I can in fome measure account for these defects, from feveral caufes and accidents; without which it is hard to imagine that fo large and fo enlighten'd a mind could ever have been fufceptible of them. That all these Contingencies fhould unite to his disadvantage feems to me almoft as fingularly unlucky, as that fo many va ! rious (nay contrary) Talents should meet in one man, was happy and extraordinary. It must be allowed that Stage-Poetry of all other, is more particularly levell'd to please the Populace, and its fuccefs more immediately depending upon the Common Suffrage. One cannot therefore wonder, if Shakespear, having at his first appearance no other aim in his writings than to procure a fubfiftence, directed his endeavours folely to hit the taste and humour that then prevailed. The Audience was generally compofed of the meaner fort of people; and therefore the Images of Life were to be drawn from thofe of their own rank accordingly we find, that not our Author's only but almost all the old Comedies have their Scene among Tradesmen and Mechanicks: And even their Hiftorical Plays ftrictly follow the common Old Stories or Vulgar Traditions of that kind of people. In Tragedy, nothing was fo fure to Surprize and cause Admiration, as the moft ftrange, unexpected, and confequently most unnatural, Events and Incidents; the moft exaggerated Thoughts; the most verbose and bombaft Expreffion; the most pompous Rhymes, and thundering Verfification. In Comedy, nothing was fo fure to Pleafe, as mean buffoonry, vile ribaldry, and unmannerly jefts of fools and clowns. Yet even in thefe, our Author's Wit buoys up, and is born above his fubject: his Genius in thofe low parts is like fome Prince of a Romance in the difguife of a Shepherd or Peafant; a certain Greatnefs and Spirit now and then break out, which manifeft his higher extraction and qualities. It may be added, that not only the common Audience had no notion of the rules of writing, but few even of the better fort piqu'd themselves upon any great degree of knowledge or nicety that way; 'tilk Ben Johnson getting poffeffion of the Stage, brought critical learning into vogue: And that this was not done 1 done without difficulty, may appear from those frequent leffons (and indeed almost Declamations) which he was forced to prefix to his firft plays, and put into the mouth of his Actors, the Grex, Chorus, &c. to remove the prejudices, and inform the judgment fof his hearers. 'Till then, our Authors had no thoughts of writing on the model of the Ancients : their Tragedies were only Hiftories in Dialogue; and their Comedies followed the thread of any Novel as they found it, no lefs implicitly than if it had been e true History. To judge therefore of Shakespear by Ariftotle's. rules, is like trying a man by the laws of one Country, who acted under thofe of another. He writ to the People; and writ at firft without patronage from the better fort, and therefore without aims of pleafing them without affistance or advice from the Learned, as without the advantage of education or acquaintance among them: without that knowledge of the best emodels, the Ancients, to infpire him with an emulation of them; in a word, without any views of Reputation, and of what Poets are pleas'd to call Immortality: Some or all of which have encourag'd the vanity, or animated the ambition, of other writers.. Yet it must be obferv'd, that when his performances had merited the protection of his Prince, and when the encouragement of the Court had fucceeded to that of the Town; the works of his riper years are manifeftly raised above thofe of his former. The Dates of his plays fufficiently evidence that his productions improved, in proportion to the refpect he had for his auditors. And I make no doubt this obfervation would be found true in every inftance, were but Editions extant from which we might learn the exact time when every piece was compofed, and whether writ for the Town, or the Court. VOL. I. b Another |