Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A33903
|
A defence of The short view of the profaneness and immorality of the English stage, &c. being a reply to Mr. Congreve's Amendments, &c. and to the vindication of the author of The relapse / by Jeremy Collier ...
|
Collier, Jeremy, 1650-1726.
|
1699
(1699)
|
Wing C5248; ESTC R20799
|
69,120
|
146
|
you would think him extreamly Innocent But after all this unconcernedness 〈◊〉 his Crime should not be little I am afraid his Conscience will appear so However he complains he is mightily overcharg'd and that all the stretch of the Prophaneness lies in Ld. Foppington 's Gad and Miss Hoyden's I-Cod Now Hoyden's Expression I take to be rank Swearing neither does he deny it And as for Ld. Foppington he adds By to Gad which in his particular way of Pronouncing o like a is broad and downright This Gentleman would excuse himself by the Liberties of Conversation and gives several Instances of disguised Oaths What means he by insisting so much upon Precedent Does Custom justifie a Fault Is Sin Improv'd into Privelege and can a Man Swear by Common-Law Besides all the Instances mention'd excepting Par Die are less Criminal than his own And were it otherwise no sort of Profaneness is fit for Representation as I have prov'd sufficiently already This Author complains my Accusations against him almost always run in general Terms c. Well If a List of Particulars will oblige him he shall have it I did not take this Method for want of Evidence I can assure him The petty Oaths and Curses as I suppose the Poets think them together with the vain Invocation of the Name of God I shall omit To transcribe or point to them would be tedious But as for those of a blacker Complexion tho they must not be produced the Reader may see them if he pleases And then he may judge if I have done the Vindicator any wrong by pronouncing them Rampant and Scandalous In the Relapse this Horrible Rhetorick is spoken by Ld. Foppington Young Fashion Seringe Coupler and Miss Hoyden To these we must add Iustice Tunbelly who to make himself the better Magistrate Swears like a Bully with open Mouth The Provok'd-Wife is little better Sir Iohn and the Colonel Swear with a great deal of Relish and Noise and Constant is not over stanch Some of these Pages have double Charges and so have some in the Relapse Cursing and Fiends Language is likewise very frequent in the Provok'd-Wife Now tho Oaths are not Curses may be Blasphemy Fashion's is so in a horrible manner This fine Gentleman does not stick to Curse the Author of his Being for making him younger than his Brother But this is not all the Blasphemy the Relapser has to account for And now at the close of the Article I must own my self surpriz'd at the Courage of the Vindicator That a Man thus Ill prepar'd should cast the Cause upon so bold an Issue press for a second Hearing and call for a Charge in Particulars The second Branch of the Stage's Profaneness is the Abuse of Religion and Holy Scripture How does the Vindicator excuse himself here He says Before he fell upon me for an Abuser of Holy Scripture he should first clearly have prov'd That no Story Phrase or Expression whatsoever in the Scripture should be either repeated or so much as alluded to upon the Stage In return to this I must say I have hinted this pretty strongly already and proved it by plain Implication To argue the point more at length I did not then think necessary For what can be more evidently Impious than to throw the most Solemn and the most Trifling things into the same Composition to make Religion part of our Sport and the Bible furnish out the Stage I thought no Person professing Christianity could have wanted Information in this Case But since I find the Poets disposed to Cavil I have satisfied this Objection more at large in my Reply to Mr. Congreve The Vindicator's next attempt is very remarkable The Scripture says he is made up of History Prophecy and Precept which are things in their own Nature capable of no other Burlesque than what calls in question either their Reality or their Sense To this I Answer 1 st That the Vindicator is out in his Notion of Burlesque To Burlesque a Book is to turn it into Ridicule Now this may be done without questioning the History or mistaking the Text. To apply the Case To doubt the Meaning of some part of the Bible may be done without a Fault I confess to question any Facts in Scripture would be to renounce Christianity But then to make Diversion with them is still worse And adds Contempt to Infidelity Indeed to take these Freedoms with Religion is a sign of a slender Belief We don't see Comedy Garnished with Parliament-House-Speeches No. Where people are sure to be punished they are careful not to provoke 2 ly To believe the Scripture God's Word and to play with it heightens the Presumption 'T is a horrid Reflection on the Divine Wisdom It supposes the Concerns of the other World over flourish'd that a Pompoâ—s out-side is given to Things Insignificant and that the weight of the Cause holds no proportion with the Solemnity of the Court. Now that this Gentleman has several times brought the Bible to jest for him is clear beyond all Contradiction 3 ly The Vindicator is cast upon his own state of the Case For his Play not only questions the Truth of the Scripture but denies it and gives an Instance to prove the Assertion and to give the more Credit to 't it comes from the best Character in the Poem 'T is done in a Soliloquy too where according to our Author the person who speaks is always supposed to deliver his real thoughts to the Audience Amanda is the person Le ts hear her What slippery Stuff are Men Composed of Sure the Account of their Creation's false And 't was the Womans Rib that they were form'd of This Lady it seems spoke this for the good of the Publick Her business like Worthy's was to Instruct the Audience Yes the design of a Soliloquy is to prevent misconstruction to direct the Understanding and secure the Interest of Virtue 'T is possible the Account of Man's Creation might have been thought true and the meaning of the Relapse misunderstood if Amanda had not been drawn out single for this Service Well But the Gentleman who writ this Speech is gone to Muscovy I hope not to tell them the History of the Creation is false well let him go I think this Town may spare him But tho the Man is gone to Muscovy the Play is here and so is the Author too who took the pious Muse into his Protection and made her Free of his Poem Suppose this new Lawreâ—â— should write a Treasonable Copy of Verses upon the Czar and sheer off from Mosco when he had done Suppose a Brother Poet of the Place should borrow them for his proper use and Act and Publish them for his own Would it be a sufficient excuse for the Latter to alledge that they were only borrowed that his Friend was gone into a remote Country but That to his Knowledge he had too much Veneration
always fasten'd to a Chain and Familiarity a proof of Servitude The Resemblance in the Question respects Behaviour more than Condition and implies nothing farther than general Inequality Now I hope 't is no affront to the Stage to suppose them Inferior to the House of Lords His remaining Instance from my Preface is much like This and requires no farther Answer Thus Mr. Congreve may perceive I have call'd him no Names hitherto But now he may be assured I should have distinguish'd his Character a little and paid him some proper Acknowledgments but that I have no Inclination for his way of Disputing Railing is a mean and unchristian Talent and oftentimes a sign of a desperate Cause and a desperate Conscience As to the bad Imputations these Stage-Advocates would throw upon me I am not in the least disturb'd at Them I thank God they are not only without Truth but without Colour Could They have made the Slander passable we should have heard farther from them This is an admirable way of answering Books All that I shall say to 't is that I pity the Men and despite the Malice To proceed Mr. Congreve is now making Out-works to fortify the Garison He lays down four Rules as the Test of Criticism and Comedy These He calls Postulata as if they were Principles of Science and carried the Evidence of an Axiom And after he has spent some Pages in setting down these Demonstrative Things he frankly tells us they seem at first Sight to comprehend a Latitude Do they so Then they are not Self-evident They are unqualifyed for the Post he has put them in and prove nothing but Sophistry and Legerdemain Well! What tho' these Rulâ—s are false in themselves Mr. Congreve promises to make them True before he has done with them For they shall be so limited and restrain'd and used with such Discretion that the Reader shall be perfectly indemnifyed However I can't help suspecting these fair Words For if He intends to deal clearly why does he make the Touchstone faulty and the Standard uncertain For these reasons I must examine for my Self And since he owns his Propositions not evidently true I 'll try if I can't prove the greatest part of them evidently false To begin with him His Latitude of Comedy upon Aristotle's Definition as he Explains it wont pass without Limitation For 1 st His Construction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is very questionable These Words may as properly be Translated the Common as the worst Sort of People And thus Hesychius interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 ly Comedy is distinguish'd from Tragedy by the Quality of the Persons as well as by other Circumstances Aristotle informs us that the Appearance Characters or Persons are greater in Tragedy than in Comedy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to this Sense Petitus interprets the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 affirming they ought to relate to Quality as well as Manners Now as the Business of Tragedy is to repreâ—ent Princes and Persons of Quality so by the Laws of Distinction Comedy ought to be confin'd to the ordinary Rank of Mankind And that Aristotle ought to be thus interpreted appears from the Form of New Comedy set up in the Time of this Philosopher And tho' we have none of these Comedies extant 't is agreed by the Criticks that they did not meddle with Government and Great People The Old Comedy being put down upon this Score And tho' Menander and the rest of that Set are lost we may guess at their Conduct from the Plays of Plautus â—nd Terence in all which there is not so much as one Person of Quality represented Farther Mr. Congreve's Reason why Aristotle should be interpreted by Manners and not Quality is inconclusive His remark on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will serve as well the other way Le ts try it a little Aristotle shall say then that Comedy is an imitation of the ordinary and middle sort of People but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every branch and aggravation of Vice for as Mr. Congreve observes there are Crimes too daring and too horrid for Comedy Now I desire to know if this Sense is not clear and unembarrass'd if it does not distinguish Comedy from Tragedy and bring down the Definition to Matter of Fact But granting Mr. Congreve his Definition all Blemishes and Instances of Scandal are not fit to make sport with Covetousness and Profusion Cowardize Spleen and Singularity well managed might possibly do But some Vices Mr. Congreve confesses are too daring for Comedy Yes and for Tragedy too And among these I 'll venture to say Profaneness is one This Liberty even Aristotle durst not allow He knew the Government of Athens would not endure it And that some of the Poets had been call'd to account upon this Score 2 ly Immodesty and lewd Talking is another part of Vice which ought not to appear in Comedy Aristotle blames the Old Comedians for this sort of Mismanagement and adds that intemperate Rallying ought to lie under publick Restraint And therefore Mr. Congreve is mistaken in his Consequence if he makes it general For the looser sort of Livers as to the Foulness of Conversation are no proper Subject of Comedy But supposing Aristotle more liberal to Mr. Congreve what service would it do him Does not Christianity refine the Pleasures and abridge the Liberties of Heathenism St. Paul bids us put away all filthyness and foolish talking and that such things ought not so much as to be named amongst Christians And when Revelation says one thing and Paganism another how are we to determine Is not an Apostle's Testimony more cogent than that of a Philosopher and the New Testament above all the Rules of Aristotle and Horace Thus we see his first Postulatum is far from being true in the Generality stated by him Before I part with him on this Head I can't but take notice of his saying that the Business of Comedy is to delight as well as instruct If he means as much by as well he is mistaken For Delight is but the secondary End of Comedy as I have prov'd at large And to satisfy him farther I 'll give him one Testimony more of Mr. Dryden's 'T is in his Preface to Fresnoy's Art of Painting Here he informs us that as to Delight the parallel of the two Arts holds true with this difference That the principal End of Painting is to please and the chief design of Poetry is to instruct Thus Mr. Congreve's first Rule signifies little And therefore his Second being but a consequence of it must fall of Course Pleasure especially the Pleasure of Libertines is not the Supreme Law of Comedy Vice must be under Discipline and Discountenance and Folly shown with great Caution and Reserve Lussious Descriptions and Common Places of Lewdness are unpardonable They affront the virtuous and debauch the unwary