6 one jot to their respectability, either in their own eyes, or those of any one else, the very insignificance of the attainment irritating their impatience; for it is the humour of such dispositions to argue, If they cannot succeed in what is trifling and contemptible, how should they succeed in anything else?' If they could make the circuit of the arts and sciences, and master them all, they would take to some mechanical exercise, and if they failed, be as discontented as ever. All that they can do, vanishes out of sight the moment it is within their grasp, and nothing is but what is not.' A poet of this description is ambitious of the thews and muscles of a prize-fighter, and thinks himself nothing without them. A prosewriter would be a fine tennis-player, and is thrown into despair because he is not one, without considering that it requires a whole life devoted to the game to excel in it; and that, even if he could dispense with this apprenticeship, he would still be just as much bound to excel in rope-dancing, or horsemanship, or playing at cup and ball like the Indian jugglers, all which is impossible. This feeling is a strange mixture of modesty and pride. We think nothing of what we are, because we cannot be everything with a wish. Goldsmith was even jealous of beauty in the other sex, and the same character is attributed to Wharton by Pope: Though listening senates hung on all he spoke, Players are for going into the church-officers in the army turn players. For myself, do what I might, I should think myself a poor creature unless I could beat a boy of ten years old at chuckfarthing, or an elderly gentleman at piquet.' ་ Reader, believe him not! At least, if he thought himself a poor creature, he would think others a great deal poorer, who could neither play at chuck-farthing, nor write good prose essays! The whole of this reasoning is imperfect, and merely goes to say the worst of one species of egotism, and the best of another. It is a trick played by the world in general in behalf of the prevailing sort of egotism, which is not that which has a gallant air with it, and some obvious pretension to go upon. There are more solemn coxcombs than lively ones, at least in England; because there are more who have little to say for themselves, more less gifted by nature with external advantages and a lively current of blood. For our parts, vanity being a good-natured gift of providence to keep men in heart with themselves, we have sometimes suspected, however it may be more or less obvious, that all men are equally vain; though all men, for that very reason, have not an equal inclination to think so. At all events, we are certain that a great deal ought to come under the head of vanity which does not pass for such; and that if there is a bright or modest side on which to look at what our author calls an inverted egotism, it may be said in behalf of the more contented-looking coxcomb, that he does not value and set off his own figure or accomplishments because he can think of nothing beyond them (any more than Mr Hazlitt is bound to think his sentences finer than Bacon's, because he thinks well of what he writes ;) but because, as a matter of taste, he includes what he can do himself in his general regard for the graceful and ornamental, and because he has something about him, either in air, or shape, or vivacity of blood, which enables him to do so to advantage. We doubt whether there have been more men of genius slovens, than coxcombs. There may have, been more slovenly authors, speaking in the lump; but authors of genius, and other men of genius, have, we suspect, had too strong a sense of their personality, not excluding a strong sense of other and higher things, but including and in a manner connected with it, to give into that species of sordid desperation: for such it is, unless there is a total want of thought on that and every other subject. Mr Hazlitt himself has set down Lord Byron for a cox-› comb; Sir Philip Sidney for a coxcomb, Vandyke, and we believe, Raphael, for coxcombs. It is certain that all these men of genius were the reverse of slovens. Neither was Rubens a sloven; nor Michael Angelo, though no fop; nor Milton; nor, if we are to believe what was said of his fitness to grace the highest company, Shakspeare. The slovens, as a general rule, are to be sought among the inferior ranks, half wits and whole scholars; secluded bookmen; those who have come late from the country, or been brought up among the clownish; authors who have not succeeded; or who from some ill-contrivance on the part of their progenitors have about them an uncouthness, inaptitude, or physical deficiency not to be got rid of. Porson was a sloven. Vincent Bourne was a sloven. Boyse was a sloven. But we are not aware of a single great name, at least not for genius and invention, to be added to the list. Newton and Bacon were not slovens. Addison and Steele were not.. Voltaire was not. Bonaparte was no sloven, nor Cæsar; though Charles the Twelfth was. Cæsar was a fop. One thing we can affirm, from undeviating experience; that nobody, man of genius or not, ever possesses an advantage, or thinks he possesses, which he does not contrive to set off, or make others sensible of, in some way or other. They do this in different ways, to be sure; and by the unobserving, the vanity may sometimes be taken for modesty, as it is intended to be taken. The French vanity, and the Quaker, vanity, are an old story. Thus one man blossoms forth into a frill and ruffles; another retreats into the simplicity of a plain shirt; and like the girl in Virgil, in retreating, wishes to be observed. The frill is a mightier thing to him, than to the other man, for it is worthy his self-denial. He thinks it a great business to give up so small a matter. The same person will put on sober colours, not because he is not alive to the superiority of the others, but to shew his own superiority to those who wear them. Where he does not carry this announcement along with him, in necessary connexion with his appearance, you will find him like other men; as sumptuous t with ornament, for he is not to be mistaken. Then as to the inverted egotism that Mr Hazlitt speaks of, we have known a person of that temperament very ready to shew off a fine head of hair. He certainly did not cut it off, because he could not play on the piano-forte; though he did, when it began to fail him. He is now, we believe, all for energy of countenance. Egotists of this description do not think nothing of a talent, because they possess it; and so, for that reason, impatiently desire the possession of others. Their impatience is in direct proportion to the opinion they have of what they possess; and Mr Hazlitt, in this contradictory essay, has said as much, when he represents them as thinking any accomplishment" wonderful indeed, that baffles their skill." They are not, it is true, as easily satisfied as egotists of the more sanguine description; but to attribute this to modesty, is to confound the impatience of a will royal with that of a beggar, and then give it the advantage over the gaiety of a court page. Queen Elizabeth could not bear that a young lady at her court should have a dress which particularly struck her royal fancy. She contrived to get possession of it, wore it though it did not fit her, and when she found this out, still would not let the other have it. This was not because she did not think well of the thousand other dresses which she had in her wardrobe, and which she delighted in putting on: it was merely because she, who possessed all those dresses, and had pampered her will with them, could not bear to think that any body else.should compete with her in a single gown. Her knowledge of the existence of this gown, or of its having existed, did not hinder her from showing off, till her dying day, in all the other colours of the rainbow. Had she contented herself with the dress when she got it, and been willing to forego all the rest of her wardrobe, a case might have been made out for the little opinion entertained of one's possessions; but when we speak of our readiness to give up those, we speak of what, we know, will not and cannot happen, and are only indulging our egotism the more by that very pretension. So superior, nevertheless, do we think this person to his foibles, and so capable of relishing a truth for its own sake, that when a friend, to whom we read this passage, said he would be very angry with it, we exclaimed, "Not he: he will be delighted!" Nobody is implacable at having his self-love disturbed, but he who has nothing else to repose upon. LONDON: Published by HUNT and CLARKE, York street, Covent garden: and sold by all Booksellers and Newsvenders in town and country.-Price 4d. PRINTED BY C. H. REYNELL, BROAD STREET, GOLDEN SQUARE. THE COMPANION. No. XI. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 1828. "Something alone yet not alone, to be wished, and only to be found, in a friend."-SIR WILLIAM TEMPLE. FURTHER REMARKS SUGGESTED BY THE PERUSAL OF MR HAZLITT'S "PLAIN SPEAKER.' Hot and Cold. This is a very curious and original article-upon Dirt and the Love of Cleanliness, as occasioned by difference of climate. The author, in a very ingenious manner, pursues the question from the physical into the moral. "Northern people," says our metaphysician," are clean, and southern people dirty, as a general rule; because where the principle of life is more cold, weak, and impoverished, there is a greater shyness and aversion to come in contact with external matter (with which. it does not so easily amalgamate), a greater fastidiousness and delicacy in choosing its sensations, a greater desire to know surrounding objects and to keep them clear of each other, than where this principle being more warm and active may be supposed to absorb outward impressions in itself, to melt them into its own essence, to impart its own vital impulses to them, and in fine, instead of shrinking at everything, to be shocked at nothing. The southern temperament is (so to speak) more sociable with matter, more gross, impure, indifferent, from relying on its own strength; while that opposed to it, from being less able to re-act on external VOL. I. 11 applications, is obliged to be more cautious and particular as to the kind of excitement to which it renders itself liable. Hence the timidity, reserve, and occasional hypocrisy of northern manners; the boldness, freedom, levity, and frequent licentiousness of southern ones." We doubt the completeness of this solution. The neglect of personal cleanliness in the Italian we can understand; it arises partly from laziness, and partly from the sanguine blood that suffices him with its sensations. The author has bolted this part of his matter to the bran. But we are not so convinced as to the reason of northern cleanliness. We are not convinced indeed of the fact. It is an argument at all events that cannot proceed d fortiori. The Scotch are accused by their own writers of being dirty; as the English were by Erasmus, in the reign of Henry the Eighth. The Russians are a very dirty people; and the Greenlanders, and others in that latitude, are enormously dirty. The people who have a long while enjoyed the greatest reputation of cleanliness, at least in their houses, are the Dutch, certainly not the most sensitive of the northern nations. Instead of seeking the water, it would appear that the colder a country is, the less inclined are the inhabitants to strip themselves for the purpose of washing, And we take this to be the fact. We suspect, generally speaking, that the English are cleaner in their houses than their persons. They recognise the virtue of cleanliness; their floors and pavements do not shudder to encounter it; but the evil day is 'put off with regard to their persons. We believe, if they were a cleanlier, they would be a livelier people. It would seem to follow that, in warm climates, the inhabitants would seek the bath as a refreshment. And so they do, where it is at hand and gives them no trouble. In summer time, on the coasts of Tuscany aud Piedmont, the villagers are dabbling in the water half the night. But in the interior, the disinclination to move outweighs the wish for the refreshment. The dirty northern "would rather bear the ills he has, than fly to others that he knows not of." The dirty southern can afford to bear them, even though pleasure invites him to the riddance. There was a beautiful girl at Leghorn, of sixteen or seventeen years of age, who said she had never known what it was to be washed. Somehow or other it did not appear to have 2 |