I have but briefly touched upon these things, because, whatever his
words are, I can scarce imagine, that "he, who is always concerned for
the true honour of reason, and would have no spurious issue fathered
upon her," should mean any thing so absurd as to affirm, "that there
is no difference betwixt comedy and tragedy but what is made by the
taste only;" unless he would have us understand the comedies of my
lord L. where the first act should be pottages, the second fricassees,
&c. and the fifth a _chere entiere_ of women.
I rather guess he means, that betwixt one comedy or tragedy and
another, there is no other difference, but what is made by the liking
or disliking of the audience. This is indeed a less error than the
former, but yet it is a great one. The liking or disliking of the
people gives the play the denomination of good or bad, but does not
really make or constitute it such. To please the people ought to be
the poet's aim, because plays are made for their delight; but it does
not follow that they are always pleased with good plays, or that the
plays which please them are always good. The humour of the people is
now for comedy; therefore, in hope to please them, I write comedies
rather than serious plays: and so far their taste prescribes to
me.
Pages:
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291