The euphony of his sentences is like the liquid flow of a river ... The life is altogether a mongrel affair, being made up of shreds and patches, like an old grandam's best bad-quilt ... a more unequal, ragged, piebald, piece of composition was never perpetrated than this sane memoir, and the author... if any one but a pair of scissors there be ... ought to be condemned to the now obsolete, but not less effective punishment,(1) of the cutty-stool. If ever a man deserved a horse pond, it is the inditer of this biography (GM, XIX, 48).

Among the Reviews (for August)(2) I have one which will, at least surprise you. It is a long notice of a satire by a quondam [page 340:] Baltimorean L.A. Wilmer. You must get this satire and read it — it is really good — good in an old-fashioned Dryden style. It blazes away, too, to the right do left — sparing not. I have made it the text from which to preach a fire-&-fury sermon upon critical independence, and the general humbuggery of the day. I have introduced in this sermon some portion of a Review formerly written by me for the ‘Pittsburg Examiner’ ... (1)

I had entertained a good opinion of the ‘Quack of Helicon’ man, and it had been brought about in a great measure by your review of the Book.(2)

Some few months since, we had occasion to speak of ‘The Biography and Poetical Remains of the late Margaret Miller Davidson* — a work given to the public by Washington Irving ... In our August number we quoted in full some stanzas ... (GM, XIX, 302; H, X, 221, 223).

Its length, viewed in connection with its keepingp its unityo its adaptation, and completeness, will impress the metaphysician most forcibly ... The nature of inspiration is indisputable — and we will not pretend to assert that Mr. Irving is in the wrong. His words, however, in their hyperbole, do wrong to his subject, and would be hyperbole still, if applied to the most exalted poets of all time (GM, XI, 94; H, X, 178);

This was at a period when we humbled ourselves with a subserviency which would have been disgusting had it not been ludicrous, bef ore the crudest critical dicta of Great Britain(1) ...But it costs us no effort to distinguish that which, in our heart, is love of their worth, from that which, in our intellect, is appreciation of their poetic ability. With the former, as critic, we have nothing to do (GM, XIX, 304-5; H, X, 224, 226).(2)

In an article(1) on this head, which appeared in the New York Reviews we pointed out an obvious mistranslation in the Hebrew words of the prediction —— (GM, XX, 94: H, X, 180) ;

The ‘Marrying Plan’ is not badly written, and will answer sufficiently well for the ordinary patrons of the circulating library. Better books might have been republished, no doubt; but this, we presume, will sell, and thus serve its purpose (GM, XIX, 94).

His poems have, in many respects, merits in same respects merit of a high order. His themes are often well selected, lofty, and giving evidence of the true spirit. But their execution is always disfigured by a miserable verbiage — wordsmeaning nothing, although sounding like sense, like the nonsense verses of Du Bartas (GM, XX, 94).(3)

He is, perhaps, the most erudite of all the English novelists, and unquestionably one of the best in every respect. His style is peculiarly good (GM, XIX, 94).

Will any one be kind enough to tell us who is Mr. Clinton Roosevelt? We wish to know of course. R. Roosevelt has published a little boors. It consists of a hundred little pages. Ten of these pages mould make one of our oven. But a clever man may do a great thing in a small way, and Mr. Roosevelt is unquestionably a clever man. For this we have his own word, and who should know all about it better than he? Hear him... (GM, XIX, 95).

‘But liberal criticism (ah! that is the thing) will be accepted as a favor (the smallest favors thankfully accepted) and writers who may undertake the task will confer an obligation by directing a copy of their articles to the author, at New York, from England, France, Germany, or any part of our own country where this work may reach.’ Certainly; no critic could do less — no liberal critic. We shall send Mr. Roosevelt a copy of our criticism from Philadelphia, and we would do the same thing if we were living at Timbuctoo (GM, XIX, 95).

But few equalled her — if we may so speak — in the passionate purity of her verse... It would be almost invidious to name anyone of her long poems as the finest.(2) In her shorter pieces she is often more successful than in more extended flights ... (GM, XIX, 95; H, X, 196).

These lectures are designed as a pendant to a course ... perhaps this subdivision is injudicious ... not only well written, but forcibly original ... embodies a truth of important result... traced to a distinct and sufficient cause... (GM, XIX, 95).

In some previous review we have observed (and our observation is borne out by analysis), that it ... as the deep sense of the want of this binding and commenting power, in the old Greek drama, which gave rise to the Chorus (GM, XIX, 143; H, X, 201).

No doubt it was a deep but vague sense of this want (i.e. “the want of the combining, arranging, and especially of the commenting power, now in possession of the narrative author”) which brought into the birth the Greek chorus... (GM, XVIII, 199; H, X, 123).(1)

We cannot say with Crebillon ———

————————————— un dessein si funeste

S‘il n‘est digne d‘Atree, est digne de Thyeste (GM, XIX, 144; H, X, 206).

We are not among those who regard the genius of Petrarch as a subject for enthusiastic admiration. The characteristics [page 346:] of his poetry are not traits of the highest, or even of a high order; and in accounting for his farm, the discriminating critic will look rather to the circumstances which surround the man, than to the literary merits of the pertinacious sonnetteer — In other respects he's entitled to high consideration. As a patriot...His influence on the revival of letters... His ardent zeal in recovering end transcribing antique lore ... His judgment in these things was strikingly correct ... Mr. Campbell's kind offer of permitting any skeptic to satisfy himself by going to the Museum and ‘perusing’ a huge book which he has just declared to be unfit for perusal, puts us much in mind of the candor of tcesiuncnausens and Ferainand Mendez Pintos, who, telling incredible tales of lands at the South hole or mountains in the moon, confound all doubters with a request to proceed and satisfy themselves by personal inspection ...What particularly surprises us in this volume — a large and handsomely printed octavo — is its slovenliness of style ... We observe, also, for more serious defects... defects of tone... Attempts at humor on such subjects are always exceedingly low ... Nor can the general handling of the theme of the book be said to be well done ... The book has no doubt filled, in a certain unsatisfactory manner, a blank in our biographical literature-but upon the whole, it is unworthy Thomas Campbell — still less is it worthy Petrarch(1) (GM, XIX, 143-4; H, X, 202-6).

The Countess of Blessington has never risen in any of her literary attempts above the merit of an amusing gossiper; and ‘The Idler in France’ is an excellent gossiping book, and no more. Still, this is saying a good deal for it as tikes go ... ‘Patch Work’ is a title which would have exactly suited the volumes, and it is a [page 347:] pity that Captain Hall has anticipated it... the whole interwoven in the most random manner conceivable. .... Throughout, there is much vivacity and no little amusement. Some of the scandal, if not nice is exceedingly piquant ... The French phrases with whim the book is interspersed aeve not been read in proof, with sufficient care, aid many awkward blunders. ... (GM, XIX, 144).

The chief defect of the work is a radical one, the nature and effect of which we were at some pains to point out in a late notice of Captain Marryatt's ‘Poacher’ (Joseph Rushbrook). The story being, no doubt, written to order, for Magazine purposes, and is a violent hurry, has been scrambled through by means of incident solely. It is totally lacking in the autorial comment (GM, XIX, 249; H, IX, 218).

We ourselves have one which is not ended so well as it might be — a good subject spoiled by hurry in the handling (GM, XIX, 249).

... these miscellanies embody a vast amount of out-of-the-gray intelligence interesting to the general, but absolutely necessary to the literary reader. No man but D‘Israeli would ever have had. the patience to ccmpile such a work... a vast body of undigested facts ... Industry, however, is the only merit of these volumes: in arranging this vast mass of truths, D‘Israeli has shown anything but a comprehensive mind (GM, XIX, 47).

The reputation of the elder D‘Israeli as scholar and philosopher is at least as well founded a s that of any man of his age. He has given to the world a series of peculiar books — books in which the richest variety of recherche detail and anecdote about literary affairs, is made subservient to the most comprehensive survey and analysis of letters themselves, considered in respect to their important spiritual uses. He is the only savant upon record who has buried himself, without pedantry, among the minutiae of classical lore. His works will last as long as the language in which they are written (GM, XIX, 250).

are, however, but incidental labors arising from a more extensive design — a ‘History of English Literature‘ — of which he thus speaks. ‘It was my intention not to furnish an arid narrative‘of books and of authors, but, following the steps of the human mind through the guide tracks of time, to ‘trace from their beginnings the progress and decline of public opinions, and to illustrate, as the objects presented themselves, the great incidents in our [page 350:] national annals’. In this magnificent project the philosopher was arrested by blindness (GM, XIX, 250).

Mr. Bulwer is never lucid, and seldom profound. His intellect seems to be rather well balanced than lofty — rather comprehensive than penetrative (GM, XIX, 250).

With an intellect rather well balanced than lofty, he has not full claim to the title of a man of genius... Whatever may be the true merits of his intelligence, the merit of luminour and precise though is evidently not one of them ... a peculiar bias in the mind of the author, leading him perforce, into involution, whether here in style, or elsewhere in plot (GM, XVIII, 202; 201; H, X, 132; 127).

His style in its involution had obscurity, partakes of [page 351:] the involution of his thoughts (GM, XIX, 250).

The style is so involute,(1) that one cannot help fancying it must be falsely contracted (DR, XV, 585; H, XVI, 40) ;(2) In general hs’ [[???]] atrociously involute ... this is his main defect (GLB, XXXI, 58; H, XVI, 66).(3)

To write well, the iron of genius must write in obedience to his impulses. When forced to disobey them — when constrained, by the fetters of a methodical duty, to compose at all hours — it is but a portion of his nature — it is but a condition of his intellect — that he should occasionally grovel in platitudes [page 352:] of the most pitiable description. And this fact will go farther than any one hitherto adduced, to explain in character of a fatality which has so constantly attended genius as to have become a sure index of its existence: — we mean the fatality of alternate high eulogium and virulous invective. Few men are conversant with the whole works of an author. Now, in the case of two critics of equal ability, it may happen (end we know it does frequently so happen) that the opinion of ony [[???]] may be based solely upon the author's best efforts, while that of the other is deducted from some mere task-work labored out in hours of the most utter inappetency and exhaustion. The dissent of the latter (a dissent just if we regard only the means of judgment) will, of course be extravagant in denunciation, precisely in the ratio (1) of his astonishment and idignation at what he supposes the corrupt panegyric of the former (GM, XIX, 251; H, X, 208).

Colonel Napier's ‘History of the Peninsula War’ is a work whose general features are sufficiently well understood. In tae thoroughness of its survey and in the minute and exact particularity, of its details, if not in the more important and comprehensive regards, it is equalled certainly by no other book on the suoject discussed, and perhaps by fear histories of any kind ... The agitating incidents quorum pars magna fuit have so forcibly impressed [page 353:] his imagaination [[imagination]] as to mislead his understanding in respect to the relative importance of these events (GM, XIX, 252).

The gentlemen in question are, of course, the best judges of their own affairs, but it does seem to us that they have erred in permitting the foreign value and reputation of the work to influence them in making an American reprint (GM, XIX, 252).

Many of the characters are chef d‘ouvres (sic).  . . The work abounds with pathos... in solemn banter it is unequalled. On the whole, though long and too diffuse, this is an excellent novel. We recommend it particularly (Cas., XVIII, November, 1840).

Its mere English is disgraceful ... the grossest misusages of language — the most offensive vulgarities of speech and violations of grammar. The whole tone is in the last degree mawkish and inflated ... There is no attempt at plot but some of the incidents are woefully ill adapted and improbable ... The character of Aubrey is a ridiculous piece of overdone sentimentality ... and in character generally the author fails ... stupid and beastly indecencies ... (GM, XIX, 252; H, X, 212). [page 354:]

His ‘Two Years Before the Mast’ was very deservedly, one of the most popular books ever published, and proved immensely profitable — at least to his booksellers. It gave, in a rich strain of philosophical observation, all the racy spirit, as the present volume conveys all the exact letter of the sea (GM, XIX, 306).

embracing first, in as popular, that is to say, in as untechnical form as possible, the philosophy of latitude and longitude — the general principles of which may be rendered intelligible to almost any understanding — and, secondly, to formulae employed in the application of these principles to navigation, with concise notes for the use of sextant and chronometer, and for solar, lunar, and stellar observations (GM, XIX, 306).

This is a book about little can be said, except in the way of general and pointed commendation. Its title fully explains its character(1) ... These scraps embody specimens of every variety of the prose literature of Germany — convey, in petto, its whole soul (GM, XIX, 306).

In general, Mr. Slams should be considered as one giving indication, rather than proof of high genius... (1) so far, with slight exceptions, he has buried this fine talent in his themes. He should never have written ‘The Partisan”, nor “The Yemassee’...His genius does not lie it the outward so much as in the inner world. ‘Martin Faber’ did him honor ...We welcome him home to his own proper field of exertion — the field of Godwin and Brown — the field of his own rich intellect and glowing heart (GM, XIX, 306).

It abounds, even more than either of these works (Pelham and Vivian Grey), in point, pungency and vivacity, but falls below them in true wit, and in other higher qualities... The theme is a good one well managed (GM, XIX, 306).