Hugh Walker is
writing in The English Essay and
Essayists (J.M. Dent & Sons, 1915). He was born the year of the siege
of Sevastopol and died just months before Hitler invaded Poland. In his
introduction Walker tries with little success to define the essay, though he
does cite Dr. Johnson’s attempt, which is still my favorite: “a loose sally of
the mind.” For three and a half pages he rambles about, trying out definitions,
finding none comprehensive, which seems appropriate to so idiosyncratic a form.
But he does teach me a new word: “It is the literary form of the pococurante.”
News to me, but the OED proves him
right: “a careless, indifferent, or nonchalant person.” It probably derives
from Seigneur Pococurante, “a fictional apathetic Venetian senator in Voltaire’s
Candide.”
Walker
refers to “essays more strictly so called in which we do detect a special
literary form.” He names Montaigne and Lamb as the embodiment of this quality. Modern
scholars would find his taxonomy flabby and inexact, but essays seem to be the
formless form – not chaotic but answering in a very private way to a writer’s
sensibility. No one ever wrote like A.J. Liebling, V.S. Pritchett or Hubert
Butler. They make their own rules and cavalierly violate them when it serves
their purpose. Walker nicely quotes his fellow Scot, Alexander Smith
(1830-1867), in his “On the Writing of Essays”:
“The essay,
as a literary form, resembles the lyric, in so far as it is moulded by some
central mood—whimsical, serious, or satirical. Give the mood, and the essay,
from the first sentence to the last, grows around it as the cocoon grows around
the silkworm. The essay-writer is a chartered libertine, and a law unto
himself.”
The essay
today is enduring a dry spell. We have Joseph Epstein and – who? Guy Davenport
is dead. Who is our Swift, Hazlitt or Beerbohm?
No comments:
Post a Comment