The article prefixed to beauty, in the beginning of this sentence, might have been omitted, and the Style have run, perhaps, to more advantage thus: But if beauty, or uncommonness, be joined to this grandeur—A landscape cut out into rivers, woods, &c. seems unseasonably to imply an artificial formation and would have been better expressed by, diversified with rivers, woods, &c.

"Every thing that is new or uncommon, raises a pleasure in "the imagination, because it fills the soul with an agreeable "surprise, gratifies its curiosity, and gives it an idea of which "it was not before possessed. We are, indeed, so often con"versant with one set of objects, and tired out with so many "repeated shows of the same things, that whatever is new or "uncommon contributes a little to vary human life, and to di"vert our minds, for a while, with the strangeness of its ap.66 pearance. It serves us for a kind of refreshment, and takes "off from that satiety we are apt to complain of in our usual "and ordinary entertainments.

The Style in these sentences flows in an easy and agreeable manner. A severe critic might point out some expressions that would bear being retrenched. But this would alter the genius and character of Mr. Addison's Style. We must always remember, that good composition admits of being carried on under many different forms. Style must not be reduced to one precise standard. One writer may be as agreeable, by a pleasing diffuseness, when the subject bears, and his genius prompts it, as another by a concise and forcible manner. It is fit, however, to observe, that in the beginning of those sentences which we have at present before us, the phrase, raises a pleasure in the imagination, is unquestionably too flat and feeble, and might easily be amended, by saying, affords pleasure to the imagination; and towards the end, there are two of's, which grate harshly on the ear, in that phrase, takes off from that satiety we are apt to complain of; where the correction is as easily made as in the other case, by substituting, diminishes that satiety of which we are apt to complain. Such instances shew the advantage of frequent reviews of what we have written, in order to give proper correctness and polish to our language.

"It is this which bestows charms on a monster, and makes even the imperfections of nature please us. It is this that "recommends variety where the mind is every instant called "off to something new, and the attention not suffered to dwell "too long and waste itself, on any particular object. It is this "likewise, that improves what is great or beautiful, and makes "it afford the mind a double entertainment."

Still the Style proceeds with perspicuity, grace and harmony. The full and ample assertion, with which each of these sentences is introduced, frequent on many occasions, with our Author, is here proper and seasonable: as it was his intention to magnify, as much as possible, the effects of novelty and variety, and to draw our attention to them. His frequent use of that, instead of which, is another peculiarity of his Style; but, on this occasion in particular, cannot be much commended, as it is this which, seems, in every view, to be better than, it is this that, three times repeated. I must, likewise, take notice, that the antecedent to, it is this, when critically considered, is not altogether proper. It refers, as we discover by the sense, to whatever is new or uncommon. But as it is not good language to say, whatever is new bestows charms on a monster, one cannot avoid thinking that our Author had done better to have begun the first of these three sentences, with saying, It is novelty which bestows charms on a monster, &c.

"Groves, fields and meadows, are at any season of the year "pleasant to look upon; but never so much as in the opening "of the spring, when they are all new and fresh, with their "first gloss upon them, and not yet too much accustomed and "familiar to the eye."

In this expression, never so much as in the opening of the spring, there appears to be a small error in grammar; for when the construction is filled up, it must be read never so much pleasant. Had he, to avoid this, said, never so much so, the grammatical error would have been prevented, but the language would have been awkward. Better to have said, but never so agreeable as in the opening of the spring. We readily say, the eye is accustomed to objects, but to say, as our author has done at the close of the sentence, that objects are accustomed to the eye, can scarcely be allowed in a prose composition.

"For this reason, there is nothing that more enlivens a pros"pect than rivers, jetteaus, or falls of water, where the scene "is perpetually shifting and entertaining the sight, every mo"ment, with something that is new. We are quickly tired "with looking at hills and vallies, where every thing continues "fixed and settled in the same place and "thoughts a little agitated and relieved at "jects as are ever in motion, and sliding away from beneath "the eye of the beholder."

posture, but find our the sight of such ob

The first of these sentences is connected in too loose a manner with that which immediately preceded it. When he says, For this reason, there is nothing that more enlivens, &c. we are entitled to look for the reason in what he had just before said. But there we find not reason for what he is now going to assert, except that groves and meadows are most pleasant in the spring. We know that he has been speaking of the pleasure produced by novelty and variety, and our minds naturally recur to this, as the reason here alluded to: but his language does not properly express it. It is, indeed, one of the defects of this amiable writer, that his sentences are often too negligently connected with one another. His meaning, upon the whole, we gather with ease from the tenour of his discourse. Yet his negligence prevents his sense from striking us with that force and evidence, which a more accurate juncture of parts would have produced. Bating this inaccuracy, these two sentences, especially the latter, are remarkably elegant and beautiful. The close, in particular, is uncommonly fine, and carries as much expressive harmony as the language can admit. It seems to paint, what he is describing, at once to the eye and the ear. Such objects as are ever in motion, and sliding away, from beneath the eye of the beholder. Indeed, notwithstanding those small errors, which the strictness of critical examination obliges me to point out, it may be safely pronounced, that the two paragraphs which we have now considered in this paper, the one concerning greatness, and the other concerning novelty, are extremely worthy of Mr. Addison, and exhibit a Style, which they who can successfully imitate, may esteem themselves happy.

"But there is nothing that makes its way more directly to "the soul than beauty, which immediately diffuses a secret sat

"isfaction and complacency through the imagination, and gives &6 a finishing to any thing that is great or uncommon. The "very first discovery of it strikes the mind with an inward 66 joy, and spreads a cheerfulness and delight through all its "faculties."

Some degree of verbosity may be here discovered, and phrases repeated, which are little more than the echo of one another such as, diffusing satisfaction and complacency through the imagination-striking the mind with inwardjoy-spreading cheerfulness and delight through all its faculties. At the same time, I readily admit that this full and flowing Style, even though it carry some redundancy, is not unsuitable to the gaiety of the subject on which the Author is entering, and is more allowable here than it would have been on some other occasions.

"There is not perhaps, any real beauty or deformity more "in one piece of matter than another; because we might "have been so made, that whatever now appears loathsome "to us, might have shewn itself agreeable; but we find, by "experience, that there are several modifications of matter, "which the mind, without any previous consideration, pro46 nounces at first sight beautiful or deformed."

In this sentence there is nothing remarkable, in any view, to draw our attention. We may observe only, that the word more, towards the beginning, is not in its proper place, and that the preposition in, is wanting before another. The phrase ought to have stood thus: Beauty or deformity in one piece of matter, more than in another.

"Thus we see, that every different species of sensible crea"tures, has its different notions of beauty, and that each of "them is most affected with the beauties of its own kind. This "is no where more remarkable, than in birds of the same "shape and proportion, when we often see the male determined "in his courtship by the single grain or tincture of a feather, "and never discovering any charms but in the colour of its "species."

Neither is there here any particular elegance or felicity of language. Different sense of beauty would have been a more proper expression to have been applied to irrational creatures, than as it stands, different notions of beauty. In the close

of the second sentence, when the Author says, colour of its species, he is guilty of a considerable inaccuracy in changing the gender, as he had said in the same sentence, that the male was determined in his courtship.

"There is a second kind of beauty, that we find in the seve "ral products of art and nature, which does not work in the "imagination with that warmth and violence, as the beauty that "appears in our proper species, but is apt, however to raise in "us a secret delight, and a kind of fondness for the places or "objects in which we discover it."

Still, I am sorry to say, we find little to praise. As in his enunciation of the subject, when beginning the former paragraph, he appeared to have been treating of beauty in general, in distinction from greatness or novelty; this second kind of beauty of which he here speaks, comes upon us in a sort of surprise, and it is only by degrees we learn, that formerly he had no more in view than the beauty which the different species of sensible creatures find in one another. This second kind of beauty, he says, we find in the several products of art and nature. He undoubtedly means, not in all, but in several of the products of art and nature; and ought so to have expressed himself; and in the place of products,to have used also the more proper word, productions. When he adds, that this kind of beauty does not work in the imagination with that warmth and violence as the beauty that appears in our proper species; the language would certainly have been more pure and elegant, if he had said, that it does not work upon the imagination with such warmth and violence, as the beauty that appears in our own species.

"This consists either in the gaiety, or variety of colours, in "the symmetry and proportion of parts, in the arrangement " and disposition of bodies, or in a just mixture and concur "rence of all together. Among these several kinds of beauty, ་་ the eye takes most delight in colours."

To the language, here, I see no objection that can be made. "We no where meet with a more glorious or pleasing "show in nature, than what appears in the heavens at the rising "and setting of the sun, which is wholly made up of those dif"ferent stains of light, that shew themselves in clouds of a dif"ferent situation."