IDEA OF LAW IN POETEY 725 



we may be called upon to judge. In the first place, I would repeat 

 what I have said in an earlier lecture, that the presence of the Uni- 

 versal in a work of art cannot always be inferred from the popularity 

 of that work. Tempting no doubt it is to decide in this way, for 

 never was there an age in which Fame travelled with such lightning 

 speed as our own. There is something dazzling and impressive in the 

 sale of tens of thousands of copies of a poem or a romance, nor is it 

 for a moment to be denied that any book which succeeds in pleasing 

 the imagination of so many human beings must possess in itself some 

 striking qualities of art, though not necessarily, or even probably, of 

 fine art. For the people judge by their emotions, sensations, and in- 

 stincts, not by their reason; and it is almost as impossible to divine 

 the effect which a work of imagination will produce on the popular 

 mind as to forecast the temper in which public opinion will act in 

 the sphere of politics. All that we can be sure of is that the quality 

 in a work of art which fascinates the imagination of the people will 

 be, like the considerations that sway them in politics, simple, obvious, 

 akin to their superficial sentiments, and as unlike as possible to that 

 mysterious struggle of opposite forces, the sum of which eventually 

 determines the national action and character. A novel like The Sor- 

 rows of Wcrthcr will always be, in the beginning, more popular and 

 famous than a poem like Faust. 



Looking at the matter from the opposite side, while a work of 

 genius will necessarily have in it an element strongly appealing to the 

 universal, and therefore to the popular, imagination, we know by 

 abundant evidence that the kind of imitation which arrests general 

 attention is not that in which the essential motive thought of a great 

 poet resides. For example, a number of contemporary allusions to 

 Hamlet prove beyond question that what most impressed the audience 

 in the Elizabethan theatre was by no means the general plot of the 

 play or the character of the Prince of Denmark, but the appearance of 

 the ghost. It is equally certain, from the title attached to the early 

 acting copies of King Lear, that the imaginative pleasure experienced 

 by the spectators arose much less from the sublime representation of 

 the madness of the old king, than from Edgar's realistic assumption of 

 the character of poor Tom of Bedlam. 



Equally fallacious is it to look for the character, which is the 

 mark of all Fine Art, in singularity of expression. There is a very 

 strong tendency in our times to adopt this standard of judgment. 

 Whether it be disdain for the judgment of the multitude, or an in- 

 stinctive perception that singularity is eventually the surest mean-; of 

 attracting the attention of the crowd, every observer must have noticed 

 the growing inclination of men of genius to invent forms which reflect 

 not so much the universal character of the nation, as their own per- 

 sonal peculiarities. At first this studied pursuit of unpopular ends 



