His criticism is very distinct in kind. It is almost purely and in the strict and proper sense æsthetic that is to say, it does hardly anything but reproduce the sensations produced upon Hunt himself by the reading of his favorite passages. As his sense of poetry was extraordinarily keen and accurate, there is perhaps no body of 'beauties' of English poetry to be found anywhere in the language which is selected with such uniform and unerring judgment as this or these. . . . The worst that can be said of Leigh Hunt's general critical axioms and conclusions is that they are much better than the reasons that support them. For instance, he is probably right in calling the famous 'intellectual' and 'henpecked you all,' in Don Juan [see p. 63], 'the happiest triple rime ever written.' But when he goes on to say that the sweepingness of the assumption completes the flowing breadth of the effect,' he goes very near to talking nonsense. For most people, however, a true opinion persuasively stated is of much more consequence than the most elaborate logical justification of it; and it is this that makes Leigh Hunt's criticism such excellent good reading. . . . As a rule he avoids the things that he is not qualified to judge, such as the rougher and sublimer parts of poetry. Of its sweetness and its music, of its grace and its wit, of its tenderness and its fancy, no better judge ever existed than Leigh Hunt. SAINTSBURY, Essays in English Literature, pp. 223-226. AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION 'WHAT IS POETRY?' INCLUDING REMARKS ON VERSIFICATION EDITED BY ALBERT S. COOK PROFESSOR OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE BOSTON, U. S. A. PUBLISHED BY GINN & COMPANY PREFACE. THE essay here reprinted is the initial one in Leigh Hunt's Imagination and Fancy, which is among the very best of his prose works. In the Preface to that volume, which was published in 1844, he thus describes his object in writing it: "to furnish such an account, in an Essay, of the nature and requirements of poetry, as may enable readers in general to give an to themselves and others." suggestive, so much so that answer on those points The whole volume is Ruskin refers to it as an "admirable piece of criticism," and adds that it ought to be read with care" (Modern Painters, Vol. III., 'Of Imagination Penetrative'). Still, the opening essay is the only part of the book which bears the character of sustained exposition, the remainder consisting mostly of poetical extracts, with brief introductions and comments; it is, accordingly the part which is likely to prove most acceptable to students of the theory and art of poetry. The author is frequently inaccurate in quotation; as there is no advantage, but rather loss, in perpet V |