of view*. This will be better understood from the following observations and examples.

THE materials employed by wit in the grotesque pieces she exhibits, are partly derived from those common fountains of whatever is directed to the imaginative powers, the ornaments of elocution, and the oratorical figures, similé, apostrophé, antithesis, metaphor; partly from those she in a manner appropriates to herself, irony, hyperbolé, allusion, parody, and, (if the

* I know no language which affords a name for this species of imagery, but the English. The French esprit or bel esprit, though on some occasions rightly translated wit, hath commonly a signification more extensive and generical. It must be owned, indeed, that, in conformity to the stile of French critics, the term wit, in English writings, hath been sometimes used with equal latitude. But this is certainly a perversion of the word from its ordinary sense, through an excessive deference to the manner and idiom of our ingenious neighbours. Indeed, when an author varies the meaning in the same work, he not only occasions perplexity to his reader, but falls himself into an apparent inconsistency. An error of this kind in Mr Pope has been lately pointed out by a very ingenious and judicious critic. In the essay on criticism it is said,

"True wit is nature to advantage dress'd:

"But immediately after this the poet adds,

“For works may have more wit than does 'em good,

"Now let us substitute the definition in the place of the thing, and "it will stand thus: A work may have more of nature dress'd to ad66 vantage, than will do it good. This is impossible; and it is evi"dent, that the confusion arises from the poet's having annexed "two different ideas to the same word." Webb's remarks on the Beauties of Poetry, Dialogue II.

reader will pardon my descending so low) paronomasia †, and pun. The limning of wit differs from the rhetorical painting above described in two respects. One is, that in the latter there is not only a resemblance requisite in that particular on which the comparison is founded, but there must also be a general similitude in the nature and quality of that which is the basis of the imagery, to that which is the theme of discourse. In respect of dignity, or the impression they make upon the mind, they must be things homogeneous. What has magnificence, must invariably be pourtrayed by what is magnificent; objects of importance by objects important; such as have grace by things graceful: Whereas the witty, though requiring an exact likeness in the first particular, demands, in the second, a contrariety rather, or remoteness. This enchantress exults in reconciling contradictions, and in hitting on that special light and attitude, wherein you can discover an unexpected similarity in objects, which, at first sight, appear the most dissimilar and heterogeneous. Thus high and low are coupled, humble and superb, momentous and trivial, common and extraordinary. Addison, indeed, observes *, that wit is often produced, not by the resemblance, but by the opposition of ideas. But this,

+ Paronomasia is properly that figure which the French call jeu de mots. Such as Inceptio est amentium, haud amantium." Ter. Andr. "Which tempted our attempt." Milt. b. i. "To begird "the Almighty's throne, beseeching or besieging." B. v.

* Spectator.

1

of which, however, he hath not given us an instance, doth not constitute a different species, as the repugnancy in that case will always be found between objects in other respects resembling; for it is to the contrast of dissimilitude and likeness, remoteness and relation in the same objects, that its peculiar effect is imputable. Hence we hear of the flashes and the sallies of wit, phrases which imply suddenness, surprise, and contrariety. These are illustrated in the first by a term which implies an instantaneous emergence of light in darkness; in the second, by a word which denotes an abrupt transition to things distant. For we may remark, in passing, that though language be older than criticism, those expressions adopted by the former to elucidate matters of taste, will be found to have a pretty close conformity to the purest discoveries of the latter.

NAY, of so much consequence here are surprise and novelty, that nothing is more tasteless, and sometimes disgusting, than a joke that has become stale by frequent repetition. For the same reason, even a pun or happy allusion will appear excellent when thrown out extempore in conversation, which would be deemed execrable in print. In like manner, a witty repartee is infinitely more pleasing than a witty attack. For though, in both cases, the thing may be equally new to the reader, or hearer, the effect on him is greatly injured, when there is access to suppose, that it' may be the slow production of study and premeditation. This, however, holds most with regard to the

inferior tribes of witticisms, of which their readiness is the best recommendation.

THE other respect in which wit differs from the illustrations of the graver orator, is the way wherein it affects the hearer. Sublimity elevates, beauty charms, wit diverts. The first, as hath been already observed, enraptures, and, as it were, dilates the soul; the second diffuseth over it a serene delight; the third tickles the fancy, and throws the spirits into an agreeable vibration.

To these reflections I shall subjoin examples in each of the three sorts of wit above explained.

Ir will, however, be proper to premise, that if the reader should not at first be sensible of the justness of the solutions and explications to be given, he ought not hastily to form an unfavourable conclusion. Wherever there is taste, the witty and the humorous make themselves perceived, and produce their effect instantaneously; but they are of so subtle a nature, that they will hardly endure to be touched, much less to undergo a strict analysis and scrutiny. They are like those volatile essences, which, being too delicate to bear the open air, evaporate almost as soon as they are exposed to it. Accordingly, the wittiest things will sometimes be made to appear insipid, and the most ingenious frigid, by scrutinizing them too narrowly. Besides, the very frame of spirit proper for being diverted with the laughable in objects, is so

different from that which is necessary for philosophizing on them, that there is a risk, that when we are most disposed to inquire into the cause, we are least capable of feeling the effect; as it is certain, that when the effect hath its full influence on us, we have little inclination for investigating the cause. For these reasons, I have resolved to be brief in my illustrations, having often observed, that, in such nice and abstract enquiries, if a proper hint do not suggest the matter to the reader, he will be but more perplexed by long and elaborate discussions.

Or the first sort, which consists in the debasement of things great and eminent, Butler, amongst a thousand other instances, hath given us those which follow :

And now had Phoebus in the lap
Of Thetis, taken out his nap:
And, like a lobster boil'd, the morn
From black to red began to turn

Here the low allegorical style of the first couplet, and the simile used in the second, afford us a just notion of this lowest species, which is distinguished by the name of the ludicrous. Another specimen from the same author you have in, these lines:

Great on the bench, great in the saddle,
That could as well bind o'er as swaddle,

* Hudibras, Part II. Canto 2.

Mighty