Sentry is said to have been C. Kempenfelt, father of Admiral Kempenfelt, who deplorably lost his life when the Royal George, of 100 guns, sunk at Spithead, August 29, 1782; and Will Honeycomb has been traced to a Colonel Cleland. There appears, however, very little ground for any of these conjectures. The account of the Spectator and his Club seems to be altogether fictitious, and the character of the Spectator and of Sir Roger de Coverley are certainly among the happiest fictions that could have been contrived for the purpose they were to answer. In the other characters, although there is neither so much novelty or vigour of imagination displayed, they are occasionally admirably grouped, as in No. 34; and the whole produces a dramatic effect, adding to the other charms of that variety which has rendered the Spectator one of the most popular books in any language. Öf Addison's humour so much has been said, that it would not be easy to vary the praises that have been lavished for near a century. "As a describer of life and manners he must be allowed to stand perhaps the first of the first rank. His humour, which, as Steele observes, is peculiar to himself, is so happily diffused as to give the grace of novelty to domestic scenes and daily occurrences. He never outsteps the modesty of nature, nor raises merriment or wonder by the violation of truth. His figures neither divert by distortion, nor amaze by aggravation. He copies life with so much fidelity, that he can hardly be said to invent; yet his exhibitions have an air so much original, that it is difficult to suppose them not merely the product of imagination *.” Dr. Johnson here characterizes the humour of Addison with singular acuteness of thought and felicity of expression. Many writers seem to think that humour consists in violent and preternatural exaggeration; as there are, no doubt, many frequenters of the theatre, who find no want of comic power in the actor who has a sufficient variety of wry faces and antic gestures; and many admirers of farce and fun, with whom bombast and big words would pass for exquisite ridicule. But wry faces are made with little effort, caricatures may be sketched by a very unskilful hand, and he who has no command of natural expression, may easily put together gigantic figures and rumbling syllables. It is only a Garrick who can do justice to Benedict and Ranger; but any candle-snuffer might personate Pistol and Bombardinian. Addison's humour resembles his style. Every phrase in the one, and circumstance in the other, appears so artless and so obvious, that a person who had never made the trial would be apt to think nothing more easy than to feign a story of Sir Roger de Coverley, or compose a vision like that of Mirza. But the art and the difficulty of both are such as Horace had in his mind when he said— "Ut sibi quivis Speret idem sudet multum, frustraque laboret Johnson's Life of Addison. + Beattie, ubi suprà. But although Addison's humour was original, it was not absolutely incommunicable. It has been already hinted*, that Steele imbibed a considerable portion of it. Of this there are some few instances in the Tatler, but many in the Spectator. Indeed no two men, even allowing the superiority of Addison, were ever better qualified, by correspondence or disposition of mind, to act as auxiliaries in a work of this nature. In most cases, what the one sketched the other could fill up: what the one began the other with little difficulty could continue. We have an early example in Steele's outline of Sir Roger de Coverley, and the use Addison made of it in Addison's account of his taciturnity, and Steele's happy illustration of it in No. 4. No. 64, by Steele, must, I think, be allowed the most exact imitation of Addison's style and humour ever attempted, yet it carries every proof, that such a case can admit, of having been written with ease. Another instance of their mutual exchange of subjects appears in the proposal for an infirmary to cure ill-humour, by Steele, in Nos. 424, and 429, which was adopted by Addison in No. 440. Other examples may be traced in these volumes+; and a few other contributors, as well as many of the unknown correspondents ‡, aimed at a kind of uniformity, in which they were not unsuccessful, 66 * Pref. Hist. and Biog. to the Tatler. † No. 14. is pointed out by the annotators on the Spectator, as meriting the attention of such as pretend to distinguish with wonderful facility between Addison's and Steele's papers." See No. 599. 608, 612. 615, and 619., the authors of which are unknown. presenting occasionally some of those delicate strokes of humour, which in Addison were habitual and distinctive. He everywhere discovers the ingenium par materiæ, everywhere preserves the equability of his mind, the kindness of his disposition, and the pleasure he took jucunda et idonea dicere vitæ. No. 69. is an instructive example of the benevolent views he delighted to take of mankind and of Providence. There is a perpetual smile on his countenance; he rarely exhibits the sneer of the satirist, and perhaps never the frown of the rigid moralist. A higher praise than what belongs to human wit yet remains, and cannot be bestowed in language more appropriate than that of Johnson. "It is justly observed by Tickell, that Addison employed wit on the side of virtue and religion. He not only made the proper use of wit himself, but taught it to others; and from his time it has been generally subservient to the cause of reason and of truth. He has dissipated the prejudice that had long connected gaiety with vice, and easiness of manners with laxity of principles. He has restored virtue to its dignity, and taught innocence not to be ashamed. This is an elevation of literary character above all Greek, above all Roman fame. No greater felicity can genius attain, than that of having purified intellectual pleasure, separated mirth from indecency, and wit from licentiousness; of having taught a succession of writers to bring elegance and gaiety to the aid of goodness; and, if I may use expressions yet more awful, of having "turned many to righteousness."" As a teacher of wisdom, he may be confidently fol lowed. His religion has nothing in it enthusi astic or superstitious; he appears neither weakly credulous nor wantonly sceptical; his morality is neither dangerously lax nor impracticably rigid. All the enchantment of fancy and all the cogency of argument are employed to recommend to the reader his real interest, the care of pleasing the Author of his being." Many of the subjects discussed in these volumes may now appear trite, because frequent repetition and successive illustration have rendered them familiar; but in estimating the value and utility of such instructions, we must take into the account the wants and necessities of the public at the time they were given. Literature did not then pass through so many channels as in our days, nor were the facilities of communication so many: the number of readers was not great, and the books calculated by allurement to increase that number were very few. The demand for instruction, however, increased with the opportunities of supply, and they whom the Essayists taught to know a little, were soon incited by curiosity to know more. The duties of life had never been discussed in a popular manner, nor in portions adapted to the idle or the casual reader. Above all, the niceties of literature were not generally understood, and it is not the smallest merit of Addison, that "he superadded criticism," prescribed the rules of taste, and introduced a relish for genius that had been depressed or overlooked. His criticisms on Paradise Lost directed the public ad |
