the critic as artist-第3部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


the　foolish　method　by　which　the　still　more　foolish　philanthropist　feebly　tries　to　disarm　the　just　rancour　of　the　criminal　classes。　　No：　　let　me　play　to　you　some　mad　scarlet　thing　by　Dvorek。　　The　pallid　figures　on　the　tapestry　are　smiling　at　us；　and　the　heavy　eyelids　of　my　bronze　Narcissus　are　folded　in　sleep。　Don't　let　us　discuss　anything　solemnly。　　I　am　but　too　conscious　of　the　fact　that　we　are　born　in　an　age　when　only　the　dull　are　treated　seriously；　and　I　live　in　terror　of　not　being　misunderstood。　　Don't　degrade　me　into　the　position　of　giving　you　useful　information。　Education　is　an　admirable　thing；　but　it　is　well　to　remember　from　time　to　time　that　nothing　that　is　worth　knowing　can　be　taught。　Through　the　parted　curtains　of　the　window　I　see　the　moon　like　a　clipped　piece　of　silver。　　Like　gilded　bees　the　stars　cluster　round　her。　　The　sky　is　a　hard　hollow　sapphire。　　Let　us　go　out　into　the　night。　　Thought　is　wonderful；　but　adventure　is　more　wonderful　still。　　Who　knows　but　we　may　meet　Prince　Florizel　of　Bohemia；　and　hear　the　fair　Cuban　tell　us　that　she　is　not　what　she　seems？

ERNEST。　　You　are　horribly　wilful。　　I　insist　on　your　discussing　this　matter　with　me。　　You　have　said　that　the　Greeks　were　a　nation　of　art…critics。　　What　art…criticism　have　they　left　us？

GILBERT。　　My　dear　Ernest；　even　if　not　a　single　fragment　of　art…　criticism　had　come　down　to　us　from　Hellenic　or　Hellenistic　days；　it　would　be　none　the　less　true　that　the　Greeks　were　a　nation　of　art…　critics；　and　that　they　invented　the　criticism　of　art　just　as　they　invented　the　criticism　of　everything　else。　　For；　after　all；　what　is　our　primary　debt　to　the　Greeks？　　Simply　the　critical　spirit。　　And；　this　spirit；　which　they　exercised　on　questions　of　religion　and　science；　of　ethics　and　metaphysics；　of　politics　and　education；　they　exercised　on　questions　of　art　also；　and；　indeed；　of　the　two　supreme　and　highest　arts；　they　have　left　us　the　most　flawless　system　of　criticism　that　the　world　has　ever　seen。

ERNEST。　　But　what　are　the　two　supreme　and　highest　arts？

GILBERT。　　Life　and　Literature；　life　and　the　perfect　expression　of　life。　　The　principles　of　the　former；　as　laid　down　by　the　Greeks；　we　may　not　realise　in　an　age　so　marred　by　false　ideals　as　our　own。　The　principles　of　the　latter；　as　they　laid　them　down；　are；　in　many　cases；　so　subtle　that　we　can　hardly　understand　them。　　Recognising　that　the　most　perfect　art　is　that　which　most　fully　mirrors　man　in　all　his　infinite　variety；　they　elaborated　the　criticism　of　language；　considered　in　the　light　of　the　mere　material　of　that　art；　to　a　point　to　which　we；　with　our　accentual　system　of　reasonable　or　emotional　emphasis；　can　barely　if　at　all　attain；　studying；　for　instance；　the　metrical　movements　of　a　prose　as　scientifically　as　a　modern　musician　studies　harmony　and　counterpoint；　and；　I　need　hardly　say；　with　much　keener　aesthetic　instinct。　　In　this　they　were　right；　as　they　were　right　in　all　things。　　Since　the　introduction　of　printing；　and　the　fatal　development　of　the　habit　of　reading　amongst　the　middle　and　lower　classes　of　this　country；　there　has　been　a　tendency　in　literature　to　appeal　more　and　more　to　the　eye；　and　less　and　less　to　the　ear　which　is　really　the　sense　which；　from　the　standpoint　of　pure　art；　it　should　seek　to　please；　and　by　whose　canons　of　pleasure　it　should　abide　always。　　Even　the　work　of　Mr。　Pater；　who　is；　on　the　whole；　the　most　perfect　master　of　English　prose　now　creating　amongst　us；　is　often　far　more　like　a　piece　of　mosaic　than　a　passage　in　music；　and　seems；　here　and　there；　to　lack　the　true　rhythmical　life　of　words　and　the　fine　freedom　and　richness　of　effect　that　such　rhythmical　life　produces。　　We；　in　fact；　have　made　writing　a　definite　mode　of　composition；　and　have　treated　it　as　a　form　of　elaborate　design。　　The　Greeks；　upon　the　other　hand；　regarded　writing　simply　as　a　method　of　chronicling。　　Their　test　was　always　the　spoken　word　in　its　musical　and　metrical　relations。　　The　voice　was　the　medium；　and　the　ear　the　critic。　　I　have　sometimes　thought　that　the　story　of　Homer's　blindness　might　be　really　an　artistic　myth；　created　in　critical　days；　and　serving　to　remind　us；　not　merely　that　the　great　poet　is　always　a　seer；　seeing　less　with　the　eyes　of　the　body　than　he　does　with　the　eyes　of　the　soul；　but　that　he　is　a　true　singer　also；　building　his　song　out　of　music；　repeating　each　line　over　and　over　again　to　himself　till　he　has　caught　the　secret　of　its　melody；　chaunting　in　darkness　the　words　that　are　winged　with　light。　　Certainly；　whether　this　be　so　or　not；　it　was　to　his　blindness；　as　an　occasion；　if　not　as　a　cause；　that　England's　great　poet　owed　much　of　the　majestic　movement　and　sonorous　splendour　of　his　later　verse。　　When　Milton　could　no　longer　write　he　began　to　sing。　　Who　would　match　the　measures　of　COMUS　with　the　measures　of　SAMSON　AGONISTES；　or　of　PARADISE　LOST　or　REGAINED？　When　Milton　became　blind　he　composed；　as　every　one　should　compose；　with　the　voice　purely；　and　so　the　pipe　or　reed　of　earlier　days　became　that　mighty　many…stopped　organ　whose　rich　reverberant　music　has　all　the　stateliness　of　Homeric　verse；　if　it　seeks　not　to　have　its　swiftness；　and　is　the　one　imperishable　inheritance　of　English　literature　sweeping　through　all　the　ages；　because　above　them；　and　abiding　with　us　ever；　being　immortal　in　its　form。　　Yes：　　writing　has　done　much　harm　to　writers。　　We　must　return　to　the　voice。　　That　must　be　our　test；　and　perhaps　then　we　shall　be　able　to　appreciate　some　of　the　subtleties　of　Greek　art…criticism。

As　it　now　is；　we　cannot　do　so。　　Sometimes；　when　I　have　written　a　piece　of　prose　that　I　have　been　modest　enough　to　consider　absolutely　free　from　fault；　a　dreadful　thought　comes　over　me　that　I　may　have　been　guilty　of　the　immoral　effeminacy　of　using　trochaic　and　tribrachic　movements；　a　crime　for　which　a　learned　critic　of　the　Augustan　age　censures　with　most　just　severity　the　brilliant　if　somewhat　paradoxical　Hegesias。　　I　grow　cold　when　I　think　of　it；　and　wonder　to　myself　if　the　admirable　ethical　effect　of　the　prose　of　that　charming　writer；　who　once　in　a　spirit　of　reckless　generosity　towards　the　uncultivated　portion　of　our　community　proclaimed　the　monstrous　doctrine　that　conduct　is　three…fourths　of　life；　will　not　some　day　be　entirely　annihilated　by　the　discovery　that　the　paeons　have　been　wrongly　placed。

ERNEST。　　Ah！　now　you　are　flippant。

GILBERT。　　Who　would　not　be　flippant　when　he　is　gravely　told　that　the　Greeks　had　no　art…critics？　　I　can　understand　it　being　said　that　the　constructive　genius　of　the　Greeks　lost　itself　in　criticism；　but　not　that　the　race　to　whom　we　owe　the　critical　spirit　did　not　criticise。　　You　will　not　ask　me　to　give　you　a　survey　of　Greek　art　criticism　from　Plato　to　Plotinus。　　The　night　is　too　lovely　for　that；　and　the　moon；　if　she　heard　us；　would　put　more　ashes　on　her　face　than　are　there　already。　　But　think　merely　of　one　perfect　little　work　of　aesthetic　criticism；　Aristotle's　TREATISE　ON　POETRY。　It　is　not　perfect　in　form；　for　it　is　badly　written；　consisting　perhaps　of　notes　dotted　down　for　an　art　lecture；　or　of　isolated　fragments　destined　for　some　larger　book；　but　in　temper　and　treatment　it　is　perfect；　absolutely。　　The　ethical　effect　of　art；　its　importance　to　culture；　and　its　place　in　the　formation　of　character；　had　been　done　once　for　all　by　Plato；　but　here　we　have　art　treated；　not　from　the　moral；　but　from　the　purely　aesthetic　point　of　view。　　Plato　had；　of　course；　dealt　with　many　definitely　artistic　subjects；　such　as　the　importance　of　unity　in　a　work　of　art；　the　necessity　for　tone　and　harmony；　the　aesthetic　value　of　appearances；　the　relation　of　the　visible　arts　to　the　external　world；　and　the　relation　of　fiction　to　fact。　　He　first　perhaps　stirred　in　the　soul　of　man　that　desire　that　we　have　not　yet　satisfied；　the　desire　to　know　the　connection　between　Beauty　and　Truth；　and　the　place　of　Beauty　in　the　moral　and　intellectual　order　of　the　Kosmos。　　The　problems　of　idealism　and　realism；　as　he　sets　them　forth；　may　seem　to　many　to　be　somewhat　barren　of　result　in　the　metaphysical　sphere　of　abstract　being　in　which　he　places　them；　but　transfer　them　to　the　sphere　of　art；　and　you　will　find　that　they　are　still　vital　and　full　of　meaning。　　It　may　be　that　it　is　as　a　critic　of　Beauty　that　Plato　is　destined　to　live；　and　that　by　altering　the　name　of　the　sphere　of　his　speculation　we　shall　find　a　new　philosophy。　　But　Aristotle；　like　Goethe；　deals　with　art　primarily　in　its　concrete　manifestations；　taking　Tragedy；　for　instance；　and　investigating　the　material　it　uses；　which　is　language；　its　subject…　matter；　which　is　life；　the　method　by　which　it　works；　which　is　action；　the　conditions　under　which　it　reveals　itself；　which　are　those　of　theatric　presentation；　its　logical　structure；　which　is　plot；　and　its　final　aesthetic　appeal；　which　is　to　the　sense　of　beauty　realised　through　the　passions　of　pity　and　awe。　　That　purification　and　spiritualising　of　the　nature　which　he　calls　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇　is；　as　Goethe　saw；　essentially　aesthetic；　and　is　not　moral；　as　Lessing　fancied。　　Concerning　himself　primarily　with　the　impression　that　the　work　of　art　produces；　Aristotle　sets　himself　to　analyse　that　impression；　to　investigate　its　source；　to　see　how　it　is　engendered。　　As　a　physiologist　and　psychologist；　he　knows　that　the　health　of　a　function　resides　in　energy。　　To　have　a　capacity　for　a　passion　and　not　to　realise　it；　is　to　make　oneself　incomplete　and　limited。　　The　mimic　spectacle　of　life　that　Tragedy　affords　cleanses　the　bosom　of　much　'perilous　stuff；'　and　by　presenting　high　and　worthy　objects　for　the　exercise　of　the　emotions　purifies　and　spiritualises　the　man；　nay；　not　merely　does　it　spiritualise　him；　but　it　initiates　him　also　into　noble　feelings　of　which　he　might　else　have　known　nothing；　the　word　＇Greek　text　which　cannot　be　reproduced＇　having；　it　has　sometimes　seemed　to　me；　a　definite　allusion　to　the　rite　of　initiation；　if　indeed　that　be　not；　as　I　am　occasionally　tempted　to　fancy；　its　true　and　only　meaning　here。　　This　is　of　course　a　mere　outline　of　the　book。　　But　you　see　what　a　perfect　piece　of　aesthetic　criticism　it　is。　　Who　indeed　but　a　Greek　could　have　analysed　art　so　well？　　After　reading　it；　one　does　not　wonder　any　longer　that　Alexandria　devoted　itself　so　largely　to　art…criticism；　and　that　we　find　the　artistic　temperaments　of　the　day　investigating　every　que