263 
N O V E L. 
a third form ; and, from the magnificent romance, dwindled 
down to the familiar novel. When the novel firft ap¬ 
peared in England and France, during the reigns of Louis 
XIV. and Charles II. it was made the' vehicle for profli¬ 
gate adventures, and for the difplay and recommendation 
of loole and immoral characters. Since that time, imita¬ 
tions of life and manners have been their principal objeCt ; 
and, though their moral or beneficial tendency may often 
be queftioned, yet their profelfed objeCt is to inftruCt as 
well as to amufe. 
It has been obfeyved by Mirabeau, that fajhion is a 
world incapable of definition or defcription, and yet no 
theatre has proved more highly interefting. Novels are 
the only confolation of thole who are excluded from this 
theatre by their inferiority of birth, the mediocrity of 
their talents, or the want of fortune to procure accefs to 
it. In novels they find a defcription of beings different 
from thole in the narrow fphere to which they have been 
accultomed, and the entertainment derived from them 
increafes in proportion to the originality of the perfons 
who are their heroes, and the Angularity of the circum¬ 
ftances involved in their hiftory. Should thefe perfons, 
and thefe circumftances, tend to promote an abhorrence 
of vice, and a love of virt ue, novels then become moral 
productions; and Turgot even obferves, perhaps with a 
little exaggeration, the only ones in which he had difco- 
vered any morality. 
Mrs. Barbauld, ill her obfervations on the life and 
writings of Richardfon, remarks, that novels may he dif- 
tinguifhed into three clalfes, according to the mode and 
form of narration adopted by the author. The firft is 
the narrative or epic form, in which the whole ftory is 
put into the mouth of the author, who is fuppofed to 
know every thing; the lecond is that in which the hero 
relates his own adventures; and the third is that of cpif- 
t-olary correfpondence, in which all the principal charac¬ 
ters of the novel relate the events in which they were 
molt concerned. This laft mode appears to have origina¬ 
ted with Richardfon. With refpeCt to the advantages 
'and di fad vantages of thefe different modes, and the com¬ 
parative probability of a perfon fitting' down, after his 
adventures were finifhed, to give an account of them to 
the public, and of his difpatching a narrative of every 
interefting occurrence immediately after it happened, to 
Ills friends, by the poll, Mrs. Barbauld enters into a mi- 
mite inveftigation.. It is probably a queftion of little 
moment, fince, if the novel be interefting and well writ¬ 
ten, the reader will not bedifturbed in the middle of the 
ftory by any curiofity or fcruple about the means or the 
inducements which the narrator may have had for telling 
it. Perhaps the firft of thefe modes, the author’s own 
narrative, is the moll eligible, as it gives him greater 
fcope, and allows him to introduce greater variety in his 
mode of narration, and in his ftyle. The fecond, then, 
or that wherein a man relates his own adventures, may 
be deficient in thefe particulars ; yet it is certain, that we 
attend with great pleafure to perfonal narratives, if con¬ 
duced with Ikill. The epiftolary ftyle is a collection of 
perfonal narratives, and is therefore bell adapted to that 
fpecies of novel in which the charaBers, and not the ad¬ 
ventures, of the perfons introduced, are intended princi¬ 
pally to fix the intereft of the reader. But the general 
apology for novels in letters is, that they are written on 
the fpur of the occafion. “ Much more lively and afteCt- 
5 -ng (fays Belford to Lovelace) muft be the ftyle of thofe 
who write in the height of a prefent diftrefs, the mind 
under the influence of doubt and fear, (as the events are 
then fuppofed to be unknown,) than the narrative una- 
ni mated ftyle, of a perfon relating difficulties furmounted.” 
Clarilla, vol. vii. letter 30.—Thefe reafons might be valid, 
if the letters were real; that is, if an editor had be¬ 
come poffeffed of a fet of genuine original letters con¬ 
taining a true ftory, and he had the choice of giving the 
letters as they were, or of framing a connected narrative 
ifom them. But the cafe is very different when we know 
the letters to be fictitious, not written on the fpur of the 
occafion, and while the imprefilons on the writer were 
vivid, but only framed to appear fo. 
The French may be thought to excel all other nations 
in this fpecies of writing, if its chief excellence and me¬ 
rit confift in drawing characters with delicacy, in exqui- 
fite refinement of thought, and in great penetration into 
human nature. The Englilh novel-writers are more dif- 
tinguiflied by their Ikill in painting manners than charac¬ 
ter, and by their humour, rather ftrong and coarfe than 
chalte and elegant. The German novel-writers, in ge¬ 
neral, difplay force and wildnefs of genius ; a deep tinc¬ 
ture of ferocity ; and a difpofition to carry every feeling 
and fentiment to the utmoll poffible degree of extrava¬ 
gance and excefs. Their opinions refpeCting morality are 
of a lingular nature, and of a very queftionable tendency: 
it might almofl be fufpeCted that their object was to re¬ 
commend vice, or crime, by exhibiting it united with 
great vigour of mind, fplendour of genius, and even 
with fome interefting and attractive virtues. 
The Gil Bias of Le Sage is filled with'great knowledge 
of the world; and is evidently the work of a man who 
had ftudied human nature, under certain circumftances, 
with great attention and fkill: but his turn for fatire is fo 
ftrong and predominating, that a tinge of caricature runs 
through the whole work. One of the chief advantages 
and excellencies of Gil Bias, confifts in the correCt and 
animated view which is given throughout it, of the man¬ 
ners and habits of life in Spain, during that period when 
the aCtion is laid; nor is it polfible to conceive a more 
linking and juft picture than it exhibits., of the corrup¬ 
tion of juftice, of the extreme lazinefs and profligacy of 
the grandees, and of profeflional pedantry, prefumption, 
and unlkilfulnefs. In this refpeCt, Le Sage may be re¬ 
garded as having fupplied a too common omiffion of the 
hiftorian, who paffes over the changes of human manners 
and character, and coniines his attention to thofe events 
and circumftances only which intereft or benefit the po¬ 
litician. But the novels of Le Sage do not prefent a 
faithful picture of the charaCteriftic qualities and excel¬ 
lencies of the French authors in this fpecies of writing. 
In this point of view, Marivaux claims our attention in 
a very fuperior degree. In .his Marianne, particularly, he 
Teems to have penetrated into the very recefles of the hu¬ 
man heart, while he lays open thofe moll fecret motives, 
which, even though they influence the conduct, are not 
known or recognized by the agent in all their force and 
bearings. Perhaps his fault confifts in being too minute 
and refined in tracing the motives, and painting the feel¬ 
ings, of his character. The novels of Florian have more 
fimplicity than thofe of Marivaux, while they are equally 
interefting from the Ikill with which the narrative is con¬ 
ducted, the vividnefs and animation with which the 
incidents- are related, and the faithful portraits which 
they exhibit of human nature in fome of its molt pleaf- 
ing and amiable forms. 
Roufleau’s novels, as well as thofe of Le Sage, form ex¬ 
ceptions, in fome very important refpeCts, to thofe of the 
French fchool of novel-writers; but the difference is of 
a very different nature; and, even in the moll fpiendid and 
eloquent parts of Roufleau’s novels, the characters of the 
French fchool may be traced. He does not indeed paint 
his characters by minute and laboured features ; but, with 
the hand of genius, he Itrikes off the portrait, by the ra¬ 
pid and flowing exhibition of thofe features on which 
the foul is molt ftrongly exprefled. His novels alfo are 
uncommonly interefting, from the infight which they af¬ 
ford into the author’s own character; though there is fo 
little appearance of art in his .writings, that the idea of 
the Ikill or talents of the writer does not crofs ourmind, 
or break in upon our thoughts and feelings, while we are 
warm in the perufal; yet we no foonerlay down the book, 
than a ftrong impreffion of the peculiar character of the 
author forces itfelf on our mind. In every thing which 
he wrote, but efpecially in his Heloife, we difcover ex- 
z treme 
