1896.] on the Theory of the Ludicrous, 99 



Denham. And, assuredly, Pope by no means intended to ridicule 

 them, wlien he addressed the unhappy Welsted : — 



" Flow, "Welsted, flow, like thine inspirer Beer ; 

 Though stale, not ripe ; though thin, yet never clear ; 

 So sweetly mawkisli, and so smoothly dull ; 

 Heady, not strong ; o'erflowing, though not full." 



So much must suffice regarding the four varieties of the 

 Ludicrous, which seem to me to present special difficulties. What I 

 have said may serve to show how wide and varied its range is, and 

 how many things have to be thought of and taken into account before 

 we can even attempt to frame a theory of it. But, indeed, that is 

 not all. The matter is further complicated by national differences. 

 This is especially so in the case of Humour. Spanish Humour, for 

 example — its chief monument is, of course, Don Quixote — differs very 

 widely from all other. It is impossible to conceive of that marvel- 

 lous book as being written out of Spain, not merely on account of its 

 local colouring, but also, and far more, on account of its ethos, its 

 indoles. Pope, in dedicating to Swift the ' Dunciad,' writes : — 



" Whether thou choose Cervantes' serious air. 

 Or laugh and shake in Rabelais' easy chair." 



The lines are singularly infelicitous. The Castilian gravity of Cer- 

 vantes is one thing. The British gravity of Swift is quite another. 

 Nor is there much in common between Eabelais and Swift. Rabelaia 

 is the supreme example of what Eenan has called *' the old Gallic 

 gaiety " — it seems now well nigh extinct in France — in its moods of 

 wildest and most unrestrained extravagance. Swift, "bitter and 

 strange," is ever sober, ever holds himself in hand. Eabelais ! Yes : 

 we picture him to ourselves in his easy chair, laughing consumedly, 

 quaffing his cup of good old wine to warm his good old nose, and 

 ministered to, like Falstaff, " by a fair hot wench in a flame-coloured 

 taffeta." Swift's most outrageous utterances are delivered with all 

 the solemnity — I think this has been remarked by Taine — of a 

 clergyman discoursing in his gown and bands. I can only glance at 

 this subject of the difference in the Humour of different races. It is 

 too large, and would want a lecture, or rather a book, to itself, for 

 any adequate treatment. But, before I pass on, I should like to 

 observe how distinctly a thing sui generis American Humour is. It 

 is, I think, the only intellectual province in which the people of the 

 United States have achieved originality. I cannot here enter upon an 

 analytical and comparative examination of it. I suppose its peculiar 

 charm lies in its homely and fresh grotesqueness. The dryness and 

 crispness of the American climate seem to have passed into it« 

 Lowell is unquestionably one of its chief masters. 



H 2 



