———- 
Ja 
r 
| ae Leta itll ene 
= 
- 
* 
. 
% 
BARONESS STAEL ON ANCIENT AND MODERN LITERATURE. 
English language has not yet acquired that 
degree of perfection of which it is suscepti- 
ble, as it has been employed oftener in com- 
mercial affairs than in literature, as much 
more correctness and refinement is required 
in a language to write good prose, than to 
write good verse. 
«« Some English writers, notwithstanding, 
such as Bolingbroke, Shaftesbury, and Ad- 
dison, have the reputation of good writers in 
prose ; nevertheless, their images are deficient 
in energy, and their style in originality. ‘The 
character of the writer is not imprinted in his 
style, nor his internal emotions felt by his 
readers. It seems as if the English feared to 
give way to inspiration, exceptin their poetry ; 
when they write in prose, a sort of modesty 
or bashfulness seems to keep their sentiments 
in captivity. 
‘* The English transport themselves into 
the ideal world of poetry, but we seldom or 
ever find any animation in their writings upon 
existing subjects. The French authors are 
justly reproached with their egotism, their 
vanity, and the importance which each one 
attaches to his own person, in a country 
where the public interest had no place. But 
it is nevertheless certain, that an author, in 
order to acquire eloquence, must express his 
Own sentiments; it is not his interest but his 
emotion, it is not his self-love, but his cha- 
facter, that must animate his writings. 
<¢ In England the spirit of business is ap- 
plied to the principles of literature, and all 
appeal to the feelings and every thing that can 
in the least influence the judgment, is inter- 
dicted in those works of reason. Mr. Burke, 
a most violent enemy to France, has, in his 
work against it, some resemblance to the elo- 
quence of that nation; and although he had 
many admirers in England, there are some 
who are tempted to accuse his style of bom- 
bast as much as his opinions, and to find his 
manner of writing incompatible with jus- 
tice.” 
On this last paragraph we shall only 
remark, that if Madame Stael will exa- 
mine the writings of Mirabeau, the most 
eloquent assuredly of modern Frenchmen, 
she will find in them some resemélance to 
the eloquence of Mr. Burke. 
“ Why are the French possessed of more 
grace, taste and gaiety, than any other Euro- 
pem nation?” This is the title of the se- 
venteenth chapter. Here again we must 
revert to the geographical modifications 
of modesty. In her answer to this ques- 
tion, Madame Stael has well and ably 
traced the source of those, false’ and 
fawning manners, which are called grace 
and gaiety in France, and of that total 
- want of all manly sense and all manly 
- feeling, which inthe same language is 
_ denominated taste. 
« France then was the only ccuntry where 
647 
(the authority of thie king bein consolidated 
by the tacit consent of the nobility) the mo- 
narch possessed an absolute power, in fact, 
the right of which, notwithstanding, was un- 
determined; this situation compelled him to 
study even his courtiers, as constituting a 
part of that body of victors, which granted 
and secured to him France, their conquest. 
«<The delicacy of the point of honour, one 
of the delusions of the privileged order, com- 
pelled the nobility to decorate the most ab- 
ject submission with the forms of liberty. 
It was necessary that they should preserve in 
their connection with their master a spirit of 
chivalry, that they should engrave upon their 
shield ‘* For my mistress and king,” that 
they might be thought voluntarily to choose 
ithe yoke which they wore, and thus blendin 
honour with. slavery, they endeavoured to 
bow without debasement; grace was, if L 
may be allowed the expression, in their situ- 
ation a necessary policy, as that only could 
give the appearance of choice to obedience. 
«« The king, on his part, duly considering 
himself in some instances as the dispenser of 
glory, the representative of public opinion, 
could recompence only by applause, and pu- 
nish only by degradation ; he was obliged to 
support his power by a kind of public assent, 
which his wall, without doubt, principally 
directed, but which shewed itself frequently 
independent of all that will. Ties of the 
most delicate nature, and prejudices artfully 
conducted, formed the connection of the first 
subjects with their governor Those connec- 
tions required great artand quickness of mind ; 
grace was requisite in the monarch, or at 
least in the dispensers of his power ; taste and 
delicacy were necessary in the choice of fa- 
vours and favourites, in order that neither the 
commencement nor the limits of the royal 
authority might be perceived. Some of its 
richts must be exercised without being ac- 
knowledged, some acknowledged without be- 
ing exercised, and moral considerations were 
embraced by opinion, with such subtlety, 
that one bad stroke of politics was a a 
felt, and might be the ruin of a minister, 
notwithstanding any support that government 
should be inclined to give him. 
«« The king, of course, must call himself 
the first gentleman of his kingdom, that he 
might the more readily exercise a boundless 
authority over gentlemen ; and to strengthen 
that authority over the nobility, a certain por- 
tion of flattery was necessarily directed to 
them. Arbitrary power not even then al- 
lowing a freedom of opinion, both parties 
perceived the necessity of pleasing each other, 
and the means of succeeding therein were 
multiplied. 
«« Grace, and elegance of manners, gradu- 
ally passed from the customs of the court into 
the writings of the literary. The most ele- 
vated station, the source of all favour, is the 
object of general attention; and, asin all free 
countries, the government gives the impulse 
te - Wie virtue; so, in monarchies, the 
Tt 
