CRITICISM OF LYCIDAS - Samuel Johnson

                Samuel Johnson was born on 1709. He was a great poet, playwright, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and lexicographer. Some of the major works of Samuel Johnson are “A Dictionary of the English Language”, “A Journey to the Western Isles of Scotland”, Lives of Poets” “The Vanity of Human Wishes” and so on.

                “Lives of the Poets” or the “Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets” was published in 1779. This essay contains short biographies of 53 poets and they are arranged on the basis of the date of death of the poets. The biographies of the poets are divided into three distinct parts. The first part consists of the poet’s life, the second part consists of the character traits of the poets and the third part gives a critical assessment of his major poems.

                On assessing the Milton’s work, Johnson tells that Milton’s early works are not so good and up to the mark. He further tells that Milton himself is not satisfied with his work. Milton has written in 3 languages, namely English, Latin and Italian. Since Samuel Johnson don’t know Italian, he doesn’t comment anything about Milton’s Italian work. Regarding his Latin work, Johnson tells that Milton’s Latin works are just the imitation of the classics and he didn’t produce anything new. His English works, Johnson says that though they are not up to the mark of “Paradise Lost”, they are original and unborrowed. Milton’s earlier works are harsh according to Johnson. Though Milton had used many combination of new words they are not pleasing. Johnson tells that Milton has never learned the art of doing little things with grace.

                “Lycidas”, the pastoral elegy by John Milton was published in 1637. It is written in the memory of Edward King, who was Milton’s friend at Cambridge. According to Samuel Johnson the diction used in “Lycidas” is harsh and the rhymes are uncertain. On examining the sentiments and images of the poem, Johnson feels that they are not the outcome of true passion. He tells that the images are full of remote allusions and obscure opinions. And Johnson further adds that “Lycidas” lack in art and truth.

                The form of “Lycidas” is pastoral, easy and vulgar and the images used are long exhausted. Though this work contains a lot of mythological images, they were not employed properly. The shepherd not even knowing his own duty does not induce any sympathy on the reader’s mind. According to Johnson, combining fiction and sacred truth is the major fault of “Lycidas”. Johnson finally ends up his analysis of “Lycidas” by telling that the readers would not have enjoyed it, it they don’t know anything about the author.

                Johnson analyze the next work of Milton titled “L’Allegro” and “il Penseroso”. He judges the character of ‘Cheerful man’ and ‘pensive man’ mentioned in “L’Allegro” and “il Penseroso”. The Cheerful man gets up listening to the lark and he enjoys the sound of the cock, hounds, and the song of the milkmaid. He glorifies the raising the sun and views the labours of the ploughman and the mower. He see things that is overwhelming with joy and happiness and he delights himself in night. Once he finished looking and enjoying the country side, he moves to the ‘towered cities’ and finds happiness in scenes of splendor and of marriage ceremonies. He doesn’t do anything to secure his old age.

                In contrast to him the pensive man hears only the nightingale in the evening and he doesn’t notes anything happy around him. He only hears the sound of the sullen curfew. When he was forced to stay indoors due to bad weather condition, he sits in his room with a lonely lamp or just by the light of the ‘growing embers’. He always used to read the pathetic scenes of tragic and epic poetry. He walks into the trackless woods and falls asleep near a stream. He conducts his old age with dignity.

                Johnson further tells that there are quite a few similarities between the ‘cheerful’ and the ‘pensive’ man. Both of them love solitary and they are silent inhabitants of the breast. Both of them don’t have any philosophical friend or a pleasant companion. Though one is a cheerful person he doesn’t participate in anything and he is just a spectator of everything. At times he used to attend theatres and enjoy the plays of Shakespeare. The pensive man too never loses himself in crowds though he frequently visits the Church. Both the ‘cheerful man’ and ‘pensive man’ loves music and enjoys the notes from Pluto. The cheerful man’s cheerfulness is without liveliness and the Pensive man’s pensiveness is without bitterness.

                Johnson ends his critical appreciation of “L’Allegro” and “il Penseroso” by telling that though the images are properly selected the words are not properly discriminated. Johnson feels that the characters are not kept sufficiently apart because there is traces of melancholy in the cheerful man’s character.

                Analyzing the next work of Milton’s “Mask of Comus”, Johnson tells that as usual diction and the mode of verse are not up to the mark. Johnson tells that the “Mask of Comus” exhibits Milton’s power of description and vigour of sentiment. The allusion and images used in this work are lavishly decorated. According to Johnson, “Mask of Comus” is a deficient drama. The action is not probable. In a mask, though traditionally supernatural intervention is admitted the action of this drama is merely human. The main action revolves around two brothers who went in search of berries for their fatigued sister. They went too far in search of berries and left their sister in sadness and danger of solitude. Johnson calls this as defect over-balanced. The prologue spoken by the Spirit to the audience seems contradictory to the natural representation of the drama. The discourse of the spirit is too long and the readers don’t feel any passion or anxiety on listening to it.

                The soliloquies of Comus and the lady are elegant but tedious. The brothers starts praising the spirit instead of fulfilling their need. The brother keeps moralizing. The spirit makes a long narration but unfortunately its of no use. Though the language is poetical and sentiments are gorgeous the works fails to grasp the audience’s attention. The language used seem to be too luxuriant for the dialogue. Johnson ends up his critical valuation of “Mask of Comus” by telling that it is a drama in the epic style , it is inelegantly splendid and tediously instructive.

 

---HAPPY LEARNING----