this the action is subordinate. The French abound most in comedies of character. Such are the capital pieces of Moliere. The English have inclined more to comedies of intrigue. Such are the plays of Congreve; and in general there is more story, action, and bustle in English than in French comedy.

The perfection of comedy is to be found in a proper mixture of these two kinds. Mere conversation, without an interesting story, is insipid. There should ever be so much intrigue, as to excite both fear and wishes. The incidents should be striking, and afford a proper field for the exhibition of character. The piece, however, should not be overcharged with intrigue; for this would be to convert a comedy into a novel.

With respect to characters, it is a common error of comic writers, to carry them much beyond real life; indeed, it is very difficult to hit the precise point, where wit ends, and buffoonery begins. The comedian may exaggerate; but good sense must teach him where to stop.

In comedy there ought to be a clear distinction in characters. The contrast of characters, however, by pairs, and by opposites, is too theatrical and affected. It is the perfection of art to conceal art. A masterly writer gives us his characters, distinguished rather by such shades of diversity, as are commonly found in society, than marked by such oppositions, as are seldom brought into actual contrast in any of the circumstances of life.

The style of comedy ought to be pure, lively, and elegant, generally imitating the tone of polite conversation, and never descending into gross expressions. Rhyme is not suitable to comic composition; for, what has poetry to do with the conversation of men in common life? The current of the dialogue should be easy, without pertness, and genteel, without flippancy; The wit should never be studied, nor unseasonable.

What is the instrument of comedy?

In what way is it useful?

What evil has been done by it?
What three rules apply to it?

Why are the subjects of comedy more confined?

Ancient Come

What are the two kinds of comed

Who excel in the former ?

Who in the latter?

What characters does a masterly writ
What should be the style?

226

ANCIENT COMEDY.

THE ancient comedy was an avowed satire against particular persons, brought upon the stage by name. Such are the plays of Aristophanes; and compositions of so singular a nature, illustrate well the turbulent and licentious state of Athens. The most illustrious personages, generals, and magistrates, were then made the subjects of comedy. Vivacity, satire, and buffoonery, are the characteristics of Aristophanes. On many occasions he displays genius and force; but his performances give us no high idea of the attic taste for wit in his age. His ridicule is extravagant; his wit farcical; his personal raillery cruel and biting; and his obscenity intolerable.

Soon after the age of Aristophanes, the liberty of attacking persons by name, on the stage, was prohibited by law. The middle comedy then took its rise. Living persons were still attacked, but under fictitious names. Of these pieces we have no remains. They were succeeded by the new comedy, when it became as it is now, the business of the stage to exhibit manners and characters, but not those of particular persons. The author of this kind, most celebrated among the Greeks, was Menander; but his writings have perished.

Of the new comedy of the ancients, the only remains are the plays of Plautus and Terence. The first is eminent for the vis comica, and for an expressive phraseology. He bears, however, many marks of the rudeness of the dramatic art in his time. He has too much low wit and scurrility; and is by far too quaint and full of conceit. He has more variety and more force

227

ons

tan Terence; and his characters are strongly markd, though sometimes coarsely.

Terence is polished, delicate, and elegant. His style is a model of the most pure and graceful latinity. His dialogue is always correct and decent; and his relations have a picturesque and beautiful simplicity. His morality is in general unexceptionable; his situations are interesting; and many of his sentiments touch the heart. He may be considered as the founder of serious comedy. In sprightliness and strength he is deficient. There is a sameness in his characters and plots; and he is said to have been inferior to Menander, whom he copied. To form a perfect comic author, the spirit and fire of Plautus ought to be united with the grace and correctness of Terence.

What were ancient comedies?

What are the characteristics of Aristophanes ?
What was the second stage of comedy?

What was the new comedy?

What Grecian excels in this?

How do Plautus and Terence compare together?

SPANISH COMEDY.

THE most prominent object in modern comedy is the Spanish theatre. The chief comedians of Spain are Lopez de Vega, Guillen, and Calderon. The first, who is the most famous of them, wrote above a thousand plays; and was infinitely more irregular than Shakspeare. He totally disregarded the three unities, and every established rule of dramatic writing. One play often includes many years, and even the whole life of a man. The scene, during the first act, is in Spain; the next in Italy, and the third in Africa. His plays are chiefly historical; and are a mixture of heroic speeches, serious incidents, war and slaughter, ridicule and buffoonery. He jumbles together christianity and paganism, virtues and vices, angels and gods. Notwithstanding his faults, he possessed genius, and great force of imagination. Many of

his characters are well painted; many of his situations are happy; and from the source of his rich invention dramatic writers of other nations have frequently drawn their materials. He was conscious himself of his extreme irregularities, and apologized for them from the prevailing taste of his countrymen.

Who are the Spanish comedians?
What is the character of the first?

FRENCH COMEDY.

THE Comic theatre of France is allowed to be correct, chaste, and decent. The comic author in whom the French glory most, is Moliere. In the judgment" of French critics, he has nearly reached the summit of perfection in his art. Nor is this the decision of mere partiality. Moliere is the satirist only of vice and folly. His characters were peculiar to his own times; and, in general, his ridicule was justly directed. His comic powers were great; and his pleasantry is always innocent. His Misanthrope and Tartuffe are in verse, and constitute a kind of dignified comedy, in which vice is exposed in the style of elegant and polite satire. In his prose comedies there is a profusion of ridicule; but the poet never gives alarm to modesty nor casts contempt on virtue. With these high qualities, however, considerable defects are mingled. In unravelling his plots he is unhappy; as this is frequently brought on with too little preparation, and in an improbable manner. In his verse comedies he is not always sufficiently interesting; and he is too full of long speeches. In his risible pieces in prose he is too farcical. But, upon the whole, it may be affirmed, that few writers ever attained so perfectly the true end of comedy. His Tartuffe and Avare are his two capital productions.

Give an account of French comedy.
What is said of Moliere?

ENGLISH COMEDY.

FROM the English theatre is naturally expected a greater variety of original characters in comedy, and bolder strokes of wit and humour, than from any other modern stage. Humour is in some degree peculiar to England. The freedom of the government, and the unrestrained liberty of English manners, are favourable to humour and singularity of character. In France, the influence of a despotic court spreads uniformity over the nation. Hence comedy has a more amplified and freer vein in Britain than in France. But it is to be regretted, that the comic spirit of Britain is often disgraced by indecency and licentiousness.

The first age, however, of English comedy was not infected by this spirit. The plays of Shakspeare and Ben Jonson have no immoral tendency. The comedies of the former display a strong creative genius; but are irregular in conduct. They are singularly rich in character and manners; but often descend to please the mob. Jonson is more regular, but stiff and pedantic; though not void of dramatic genius. Much fancy and invention, and many fine passages, are found in the plays of Beaumont and Fletcher. But, in general, they abound in romantic incidents, unnatural characters, and coarse allusions.

Change of manners has rendered the comedies of the last age obsolete. For it is the exhibition of prevailing modes and characters that gives a charm to comedy. Thus Plautus was antiquated to the Romans in the days of Augustus. But, to the honour of Shakspeare, his Falstaff is still admired, and his Merry Wives of Windsor read with pleasure.

After the restoration of Charles II. the licentiousness which polluted the court and nation, seized upon comedy. The rake became the predominant character. Ridicule was thrown upon chastity and sobriety. At the end of the play, indeed, the rake becomes a sober man; but through the performance he is a fine gentleman, and exhibits a picture of the pleasurable enjoyments of life. This spirit of comedy had the worst ef