Part 12

The “Shakspeare Ode” of Mr. Sprague is, after all, scarcely an exception to our general rule in this case. We may, perhaps, modify matters so as to admit that while all prize articles are bad _ex officio_, the Shakspeare Ode is the best of them. It carries the essential error to the height of its perfection—that is precisely what we mean. Farther than this no man should go. We allow that public opinion is here against us, and that the poem in question is generally considered as a “brilliant production.” Public opinion, however, is a certain intangible something of which we have no opinion at all. By this we mean what is _called_ public opinion; for the true unbiased judgment of the majority is a different thing, but can never be accurately ascertained. If it could, it would nearly always be found in accordance with critical decision. We must keep in mind the distinction when we read the words of Chamfort. “_Il y a à parier_,” says he, “_que toute idée publique, toute convention recue, est une sottise; car elle a convenue au plus grand nombre_.”

In fact all that a just criticism can say in favor of this Ode, is that its versification is of the highest order of excellence (it includes finer lines and even finer entire paragraphs than are to be found elsewhere) and that its imagery is scrupulously accurate and well-sustained:—its imagery such as it is. What indeed can be more outrageously absurd than an obstinate persistence, at this epoch, in the mawkish allegory of ancient theology—a thing, which in its origin, and under the best circumstances, never had—never _could_ have had, from its very nature, the slightest effect or force, beyond that of an inane assent to its ingenuity. We say nothing of the imitation of Collins’ “Ode to the Passions”—this is too obvious to need a word of comment.

“Curiosity,” the longest poem in the volume is entitled just to that amount of praise which we have awarded to the “Shakspeare Ode”—while its defects (of a similar character with those upon which we have commented) are scarcely so glaring. Its versification is superb—nothing could be better. Its thoughts are tersely put forth. The style is pungently epigrammatic. Upon the whole, it is fully as good a poem as Pope could have written, upon the same subject, in his finest hour of inspiration. We must bear in mind one important distinction, however. With Pope the ideas and the management of the piece would have been original—with Mr. Sprague they are Pope’s. We will end our comments upon “Curiosity” with the general remark that didactic subjects are utterly _beyond_, or rather beneath the province of true poesy.

The “Lines on the Death of M. S. C.” are distinguished by all the minor beauties for which Mr. S. is so remarkable, while they abound in merit of a better, although still not of the highest order. They are pathetic and simple—but evince little ideality.

“The Winged Worshippers” is, beyond question, a beautiful little poem, and relieves us from a distressing doubt we had begun to entertain—a doubt whether we should not, after all, be forced to look upon Mr. Sprague as merely a well-educated poetaster, of what is (satirically?) called _classical_ taste, of accurate ear, and of sound _negative_ judgment.

* * * * *

_“The Sovreignty of Mind.” A Poem delivered before the Philomathæan Society of Pennsylvania College, February 16, 1841. By John N. McJilton. Joseph N. Lewis, Baltimore._

Mr. McJilton is a gentleman for whose talents we have much respect—far more than for his performances. Indeed, while there is indication of genius in almost every thing he writes, he has yet written very little worth reading. We remember a short poem from his pen, first published in the “Casket,” and entitled “Serenade,” which was truly beautiful—but beyond this we can call to mind none of his compositions which, as a whole, are even tolerable. There are always fine imaginative passages:—but their merit is scarcely discernible through the clouds of verbiage, false imagery, bad grammar, and worse versification in which they are enveloped.

We are grieved to see Mr. McJilton occupied in “delivering” poems to order before Philomathæan societies. It is a _business_ in which no man of talent should be employed—in which no man of genius could hope to succeed. As for The “Sovreignty of Mind” it is a hackneyed subject, and he has handled it in a hackneyed manner. It has some glowing paragraphs—but abounds in all the worst faults of the author. We do not feel justified in speaking of it at greater length.

* * * * *

Notices of “Charles O’Malley, vol. 1;” “The Dowager;” “Combe’s tour through the U. States;” “Ranke’s History of the Popes;” “Earle’s visit to thirteen Insane Asylums;” “The Quadroone,” and other works, have been crowded out.

* * * * *

* * * * *

Transcriber’s Notes:

Table of Contents has been added for reader convenience. Archaic spellings and hyphenation have been retained. Obvious punctuation and typesetting errors have been corrected without note. A cover was created for this ebook and is placed in the public domain.

[End of _Graham’s Magazine, Vol. XVIII, No. 5, May 1841_, George R. Graham, Editor]