naturally produce fuch a reproach as this→ but it receives an additional tenderness from the violent character of Lear, and the ag

gravating circumstances of his children's conduct.

If the Pathetic, as fhould feem from these proofs, muft owe its effect to the occafion which produced it; the fame may be affirmed, in part, of the fublime: I say in part, because though great fentiments, when produced in the Drama, must, in common with the pathetic, derive a particular and fpecific beauty from a happiness in their application; yet there will be this difference between them, that if a pathetic fentiment be confidered independent of the occafion which produced it, it lofes its pathetic force. On the other hand, if a sublime fentiment be confidered in the fame light, it loses the

advantage

advantage it received from a happiness in its application, but retains its intrinfic greatness. This, I think, will appear, by comparing the answers of Afpafia and Lear, in the two last examples, with the following reply of Guiderius, to the rash and foolish Cloten, who had threatened to kill him.

Cloten.

Art not afraid ?

Guid. Thofe that I rev'rence, those I fear, the wife;

At fools I laugh, not fear them.

THIS fentiment had been noble on any occafion; on this, it is happy as well as great.

FROM thefe obfervations it is evident, that the variety and force of our fenti

ments, particularly in the pathetic, muft depend on the variety and nature of their motives. In this the Painter is extremely confined; for among the infinite turns and workings of the mind, which may be exprefied by words, and become the springs of fentiment, there are fo few to which he can give a shape or being; and his indications of peculiar and characteristic feelings, are fo vague and undecifive, that his expreffions, like their motives, must be [9] obvious and general.

[2] If Painting be inferior to Poetry, Mufic, confidered as an imitative art, must be greatly inferior to Painting for as Mufic has no means of explaining the motives of its various impreffions, its imitations of the Manners and Paffions must be extremely vague and undecifive for inftance, the tender and melting tones which may be expreffive of the Paffion of Love, will be equally in unifon with the collateral feelings of Benevolence, Friendship, Pity, and the like-Again, how are we to distinguish the rapid movements of Anger, from

:

IT

7

Ir is obfervable, that the fame Critics, who condemn fo much in Shakespear a neglect of the unities, are equally forward in acknowledging the fingular energy and beauty of his fentiments. Now, it seems to me, that the fault which they cenfure, is the principal fource of the beauties which, they admire. For, as the Poet was not conf fined to an [r] unity and fimplicity of action,

thofe of Terror, Diftraction, and all the violent agitations of the Soul? But, let Poetry co-operate with Mufic, and fpecify the motive of each particular impreffion, we are no longer at a lofs; we acknowlege the agreement of the found with the idea, and general impreffions become specific indications of the Manners. and the Paffions.

[r] Ariftotle, in his Poetics, chap. vi. obferves, that the first Dramatic Poets were irregular in the conduct of the Fable; but excelled in the Manners, and in the Diction that the Poets of his time, on the contrary, excelled in the conduct of the Fable, but were weak in the Manners, and declamatory in the Diction. By the

:

he created incidents in proportion to the promptness and vivacity of his genius. Hence, his fentiments fpring from motives exquifitely fitted to produce them to this they owe that original spirit, that commanding energy, which overcome the improbabilities of the scene; and transport the heart in defiance of the understanding. I do not mean by this to justify our

Manners, are to be understood all thofe fentiments which become indications of Character. The advantage of thefe in Tragedy, according to Ariftotle, confifts in this, that they give us a rule, by which we may judge what the refolutions and actions of the perfons in the Drama will be. After this, he cenfures the Poets of his time, for being weak in the Manners. ι γαρ νεων των πλειων anders reaywdiar eo. Dacier, his Commentator, has paffed the fame cenfure on the French Drama- Aujourd hui, dans la plus párt des piéces de nos Poetes, on ne connoit les mœurs des perfonnages, qu'en les voiant agir. As both the Greek and French Poets, here fpoken of, were rigid observers of the dramatic Unities, thefe facts muft ftrongly confirm what has been advanced on this fubject.

Poet