PATRONAGE OF GENIUS. Sed non satis perspiciunt quantum natura humani ingenii valeat. IT has been a general complaint, that in this country genius has been uniformly blasted by the coldness of neglect; that its seeds have often sprung up and germinated, but for want of culture have produced no fruit, or, if any, of the meanest and most degenerate kind. This complaint, if founded on truth, is indeed disgraceful to our country. I shall not examine the justice of the charge; but, admitting it to be well supported, it is still a question, whether neglect has that deletereous influence on the progress of genius, which it has been so fashionable to believe, That genius must appear, before it can be patronized, is a position, which no one can controvert. Its traces must be discovered, and its operations observed, before it can secure praise and reward. Without proper objects of beneficence how can there be benefactors? Without Virgil and Horace what occasion for Mæcenas? Without coadjutors in the revival of literature in degenerated Italy what opportuni ty. for the munificence of Lorenzo de Medici? A disposition to cherish can never originate intellectual powers, nor give them a direction, which nature had not designed. When young men, overcoming by vigor of mind the fear of a world ill natured, and censorious, and dogmatical, offer their claims to notice, commendation and patronage may produce an emulation for literary fame, which will give their talents a fuller exercise, but can create no new powers. With such encouragement they may become more confident, but not more capable of exertion. Cannot then the best capacities be chilled by indifference, and oppressed by opposition? Doubtless. But genius has that persevering, overcoming power, which converts indifference into favor, and opposition into patronage. Sometimes this happens, when its career is well nigh finished, and sometimes it is left to the justice of another generation. Aware of the envy and sluggishness of contemporaries one of the greatest wits and best writers of the last century dedicated his most meritorious work to posterity. But this back wardness to commend and reward has neither checked the imagination of poets, nor prevented the discoveries of philosophers. Milton did not believe himself a blockhead, because his contemporaries were not refined enough to relish his Paradise Lost. Corneille did not think himself a more contemptible poet or dramatist, because he enjoyed no por tion of the patronage of Richlieu. Not the apprehension of a prison would have made Galileo less curious in discovering, and less confident in believing the truth of the Copernican system; though his timidity and actual suffering led him afterward to abjure it. It is indeed desirable, that true genius should be encouraged and rewarded; but let it not be supposed, that encouragement, and reward are absolutely essential to its progress and success. The warmest encouragement and most enthusiastic love of fame cannot convert arrogance into modesty, dulness into brilliancy, nor ignorance into learning. Among princes and the great the desire and possession of applause has had its full operation and opportunity. Many of the Roman emperors considered themselves orators and poets. They were not contradicted; but they became neither Ciceros, nor Virgils. James I was inflated with the fulsome adulation of his courtiers, the grossness of which was exceeded only by his own vanity; and what was James I but a royal pedant. True genius will ordinarily discover itself, without being drawn into light by the force of patronage. Where there is one flower" born to blush unseen," there are thousands, that attract and charm the eyes of mankind. The concealment of talents is always imputable to the possessor; the veil may easily be drawn aside, and the treasure disclosed. The effulgence of Butler's genius dispelled the darkness of poverty, and its warmth overcame the coldness of neglect. The great Dr. Johnson, so far from being checked in his undertakings by indigence, was rather stimulated; and, had he been obliged to beg for subsistence, he would neverthe less have bequeathed a legacy immensely rich to posterity. And I do not believe, that the insolent hauteur of the Earl of Chesterfield toward him, when compiling his dictionary, deducted from his merit, as a lexicographer, or philologista Burns, notwithstanding his limited reading, and information, and intercourse, rose to the first place among the bards of Scotland. Gifford, though shackled under a hard master, and serving at a trade, he abhorred; though deprived of almost every mean of improvement, had invention and perseverance enough to engrave his mathematical calculations and juvenile verses on the sole leather, which was unfit for the last. It is unnecessary to multiply examples of the progress of genius unprotected and unrewarded. Even disappointment and calamity, instead of concealing genius, lead her from res tirement. "Ingenium res "Adversæ nudare solent, celare secundæ.” Genius is independent, and active, and persevering; neither perishing with indigence, nor decaying by neglect, nor yielding to opposition. It will discover itself in the peasant as well, as in the prince, with reward, or without, aided by applause, or opposed by censure. Shame then to those, who shelter themselves under the clamor, that talents are neglected, and make the want of patronage an apology for the want of genius. That this reproach may no longer be merited, let all exert the talents, they possess; and let not the querulous begin to complain, until real literary excellence is despised, and spurious litera ture only is encouraged. M. REVIEW. Letters from London, written during the years 1802 and 1803 by William Austin. Boston, Pelham, 1804. IN some of the Asiatic Letters of Montesquieu and Goldsmith we have seen the high degree of interest, which may be given to this species of writing. Unrestrained by the laws of formal composition, the writer without impropriety mingles the gay with the grave, and relieves the severity. of reason with the vivacity of wit. The writer on the English nation, though without the immunities of a fictitious character, is peculiarly happy in his subject. Whatever is said of the little island, the seat of science, of arts, and of arms, will be received with peculiar avidity by Americans. We remember, that it was the land of our fathers, that the national characters of both countries assimilate; and we see some of the traits of its government in our own constitution. The "Letters from Lon"don" will therefore be opened with uncommon expectation. But, the hope of finding the reflections of a liberal traveller, who balances virtues with defects, who, without expecting perfection, is contented with excellence, is destroyed in the very first paragraph. We then perceive, that the writer is prepared to find "the excesses of pride, vanity, and "ambition among men, who endeavor to rise above, and "sink far below the standard of nature." Very near to admiration, it has been said, is a wish to admire, and the converse, of the adage is equally true. the "Men, morals, politics, and literature," are the professed subjects of the writer's observations. He appears to entertain a very exalted opinion of the importance of his undertaking, and with much modesty "trembles" at the idea "of supporting the re k k sponsibility of a nation." He however seems to regain the pride of conscious merit, when he informs us, that "so "dignified an office requires the pen of a Tacitus, and "should be filled only by philosophers." The two first letters are employed in desultory observations, and it is not till the third, that the philosopher begins his task in his own facetious language of "catching John "Bull." We should however do injustice to his sagacity, if we were to omit a discovery in his first letter, which is really without parallel in the conjectures of antiquarians. "The story of the Amazons," he informs us, " had its origin in the credulity of travellers, or perhaps from certain "smugglers who appeared at the sea side dressed in women's clothes." The ideas of the author appear so indistinct and confused; there is such a perpetual effort to display much, where little is possessed, that it is not always easy to determine the subject of his letters. We are however inclined to think, that his design in the IV, VIII, XIII, XX, XXX, is to describe the English national character. The result of his observations appears to be, that " they have two characters one repellent, "the other accommodating"; that "their characters, which are a combination of dignity and scurrility, are extremely angular, yet rather defensively, than offensively proud”; that "they are virtuous from inclination, but villians from principle"; that "they are careless of the opinions of "others, and the swing of the arm, the incautious step, the ເ rolling of the body, tell you plainly, that they care for no: "body, no, not they; but this may be owing to a desperate << majesty, that they assume," &c. As the reflections of every reader must be the same on this picture, we shall offer no comment. In the XIII however there are some judicious remarks on the impatience of the English under imaginary evil, and the fortitude, which they oppose to real calamity. We forbear transcribing them, as the reader will find the best of them in the Citizen of the World, in language perhaps more pleasing. |