1832.] A Modest Defence of Literary Puffing. 165 



the works announced, cited probably from reviews of their own dicta- 

 tion, or under their immediate influence, if indeed the encomium within 

 inverted commas be not altogether quotations from their own heads- 

 and this is held to be an allowable practice ; but if the paragraph in 

 question be detached, and inserted separately, there is as furious an 

 outcry against the offender as if he had committed high treason against 

 the majesty of Paternoster Row. Truly this is a distinction without a 

 difference, and I suspect that those who clamour against it are more 

 jealous of its apprehended success, than scandalized at the offence itself. 

 Even Sheridan has failed to notice one species of literary puff, from 

 which the present era is happily exempt, and which may be termed the 

 puff devout, if it might not with more propriety be designated the puff 

 profane. It is that wherein a work is attempted to be sanctioned, and its 

 circulation to be extended, by obtaining for it the imprimatur of Hea- 

 ven, a daring act of irreverence, limited, I believe, to Lord Herbert of 

 Cherbury. This nobleman having secret misgivings as to the pro- 

 priety of publishing his work et De Veritate," since the whole frame 

 of it differed from all former writings concerning the discovery of 

 truth, wished to obtain a sign from heaven as to the course he should 



Eursue ; wherefore taking the work in his hands, and kneeling down, 

 e devoutly besought some manifestation of the divine will. " I had 

 no sooner spoken these words," says his lordship, " but a loud, though 

 yet gentle noise, came forth from the heavens, for it was like nothing 

 on earth, which did so cheer and comfort me, that I took my petition 

 as granted, and that I had the sign I demanded ; whereupon I resolved 

 to print my book." If this be not rather a miserable evidence of vanity 

 and self-delusion, it is unquestionably the most audacious puff upon record. 

 There is one more species of puffing, scarcely more justifiable than 

 the above, to which I shall only allude, in order to stigmatize it with 

 reprobation, and to express deep regret that it should ever be resorted to 

 by publishers who make the smallest claims to respectability. Sheridan 

 thus admirably describes it in the Critic " The puff collusive is much 

 used by bold booksellers and enterprising poets. ' An indignant corre- 

 spondent observes, that the new poem, called Beelzebub's Cotillion, or 

 Proserpine's Fete Champetre, is one of the most unjustifiable perform- 

 ances he ever read : the severity with which certain characters are 

 handled is quite shocking ; and as there are many descriptions in it too 

 warmly coloured for female delicacy, the shameful avidity with which 

 this piece is bought up by all people of fashion, is a reproach on the 

 taste of the times, and a disgrace to the delicacy of the age/ Here you 

 see the two strongest inducements are held forth : first that nobody 

 ought to read it ; and secondly, that every body buys it ; on the strength 

 of which the publisher boldly prints the tenth edition before he has 

 sold ten of the first ; and then establishes it by threatening himself with 

 the pillory, or absolutely indicting himself for scan-mag !" 



If booksellers now-a-days do not venture to recommend their publi- 

 cations upon the ground of their indelicacy, they scruple not to attract 

 readers, by openly setting forth the personality and scandalous nature 

 of the work they are puffing, thus pandering to a vice which is the 

 stigma and opprobrium of the day, adducing as a merit that which 

 ought to condemn the book with every right-thinking and right-feeling 

 reader, and perverting public morals by an unblushing substitution of 

 wrong for right. " That's villanous, and shews a most pitiful ambition 

 in him that uses it. Oh, reform it altogether !". 



