In
“Dr. Johnson” (Literary Distractions,
1958), Monsignor Ronald Knox defends the lexicographer against the customary
slurs, including gratuitous sesquipedalianism, an offense I’ve never associated
with him. Some writers and speakers use long or exotic-sounding words to appear
intelligent or to obscure the emptiness of what they are pretending to say, but
that was never Johnson’s way. He remained ever on guard for cant and pomposity,
linguistic and otherwise. Perhaps the accusation comes from increasingly
unlettered readers and critics who prefer their prose with Dick-and-Jane plainness.
Teasingly, Knox does not specify the sentence of monosyllables deployed by
Johnson in Journey (1775), an account
of his visit to Scotland with Boswell in 1773, but his casual aside moved me to
look for likely candidates.
One
quickly finds passages dense with one-syllable words and longer words that are
nevertheless familiar. This is from the chapter titled “Coriatachan in Sky”: “The
weather was next day too violent for the continuation of our journey; but we
had no reason to complain of the interruption.
We saw in every place, what we chiefly desired to know, the manners of
the people. We had company, and, if we
had chosen retirement, we might have had books.”
Some
of Johnson’s sentences meet Knox’s criterion but hardly seem among his best: “The
sea was smooth.” “The oats that are not parched must be dried in a kiln.” Here
is a sentence (from “Mull”) with three common polysyllables, the rest all words
of one syllable: “He that pines with hunger, is in little care how others shall
be fed.” This sentence also possesses the virtue of being identifiably Johnsonian,
even out of context. His compassionate realism shines through. This next sentence
is all monosyllables but for two words: “The bed stood upon the bare earth,
which a long course of rain had softened to a puddle.”
I
have been unable to find the sentence Knox describes. Perhaps he was merely
being provocative, hoping some fool would reread Journey with his observation in mind. But the search was not
fruitless. I established that word length alone is indeterminate of prose quality,
even in the hands of a master. A terse, nugget-like sentence is not necessarily
good prose, nor is a behemoth of polysyllables necessarily bombast. Most of
Johnson’s sentences are pre-Hemingway in length and complexity (even more so in
his periodical essays and Live of the
Poets than in his travel book). They defy today’s style manuals, making it even
less likely that he would able to write them exclusively with multisyllabic words. Eighteenth-century
clarity shares little with the twenty-first-century version.
On
the page after the passage quoted at the top, Knox quotes this Johnsonian
prodigy: “Among the anfractuosities of the human mind, I know not if it may be
one, that there is a superstitious reluctance to sit for a picture.”
Unsurprisingly, the OED cites Johnson’s
usage, taken from Boswell’s Life, in
its entry for anfractuosity. It means “involution, intricacy, obliquity” –
an apt description of both the mind and the brain – from the Latin for “winding,
roundabout.” In other words, we ought to laud Johnson for precision, not fault
him for polysyllabic exhibitionism. The world is anfractuous, and so are we.
1 comment:
In The Complete Plain Words Sir Ernest Gowers quoted Boswell on Johnson revising in the direction of longer words. Thanks to Gutenberg Project, I find that the passage runs
"He seemed to take a pleasure in speaking in his own style; for when he had carelessly missed it, he would repeat the thought translated into it. Talking of the Comedy of The Rehearsal, he said, 'It has not wit
enough to keep it sweet.' This was easy; he therefore caught himself, and pronounced a more round sentence; 'It has not vitality enough to preserve it from putrefaction.'"
But I agree that he can produce great effects with small words.
Post a Comment