the genuine language of Poetry still further from
common life, so that whoever read or heard the poems
of these earliest Poets felt himself moved in a way
in which he had not been accustomed to be moved in
real life, and by causes manifestly different from
those which acted upon him in real life. This
was the great temptation to all the corruptions which
have followed: under the protection of this feeling
succeeding Poets constructed a phraseology which had
one thing, it is true, in common with the genuine
language of poetry, namely, that it was not heard in
ordinary conversation; that it was unusual. But
the first Poets, as I have said, spake a language
which, though unusual, was still the language of men.
This circumstance, however, was disregarded by their
successors; they found that they could please by easier
means: they became proud of modes of expression
which they themselves had invented, and which were
uttered only by themselves. In process of time
metre became a symbol or promise of this unusual language,
and whoever took upon him to write in metre, according
as he possessed more or less of true poetic genius,
introduced less or more of this adulterated phraseology
into his compositions, and the true and the false
were inseparately interwoven until, the taste of men
becoming gradually perverted, this language was received
as a natural language: and at length, by the
influence of books upon men, did to a certain degree
really become so. Abuses of this kind were imported
from one nation to another, and with the progress
of refinement this diction became daily more and more
corrupt, thrusting out of sight the plain humanities
of nature by a motley masquerade of tricks, quaintnesses,
hieroglyphics, and enigmas.
It would not be uninteresting to point out the causes
of the pleasure given by this extravagant and absurd
diction. It depends upon a great variety of causes,
but upon none, perhaps, more than its influence in
impressing a notion of the peculiarity and exaltation
of the Poet’s character, and in flattering the
Reader’s self-love by bringing him nearer to
a sympathy with that character; an effect which is
accomplished by unsettling ordinary habits of thinking,
and thus assisting the Reader to approach to that
perturbed and dizzy state of mind in which if he does
not find himself, he imagines that he is balked
of a peculiar enjoyment which poetry can and ought
to bestow.
The sonnet quoted from Gray, in the Preface, except
the lines printed in italics, consists of little else
but this diction, though not of the worst kind; and
indeed, if one may be permitted to say so, it is far
too common in the best writers both ancient and modern.
Perhaps in no way, by positive example could more
easily be given a notion of what I mean by the phrase
poetic diction than by referring to a comparison
between the metrical paraphrase which we have of passages
in the Old and New Testament, and those passages as
they exist in our common Translation. See Pope’s
Messiah throughout; Prior’s ’Did
sweeter sounds adorn my flowing tongue,’ &c.
&c. ’Though I speak with the tongues of
men and of angels,’ &c. &c, 1st Corinthians,
ch. xiii. By way of immediate example take the
following of Dr. Johnson: