Table-Talk by William Hazlitt (best pdf reader for ebooks txt) ๐
Description
William Hazlitt was a well-regarded critic and essayist in his day, and Table-Talk, a collection of some of his more popular short essays, is perhaps his best-remembered work.
The essays themselves range in subject from philosophy, to art, to literature, culture, society, and politics, with titles like โOn the Pleasures of Paintingโ and โOn Corporate Bodies.โ Hazlittโs intimate style and deep familiarity with many different aspects of art culture (not only was he a literary success, but he studied under Joshua Reynolds to be a portrait painter) make his essays fascinating multi-disciplinary reads.
Table-Talk was originally published in two separate volumes, and, largely due to Hazlittโs political activism, was received poorly by his contemporaries. Today itโs considered one of his masterpieces.
Read free book ยซTable-Talk by William Hazlitt (best pdf reader for ebooks txt) ๐ยป - read online or download for free at americanlibrarybooks.com
- Author: William Hazlitt
Read book online ยซTable-Talk by William Hazlitt (best pdf reader for ebooks txt) ๐ยป. Author - William Hazlitt
โAn ounce of sour is worth a pound of sweet!โ
Nothing goes down with them but what is caviar to the multitude. They are eaters of olives and readers of black-letter. Yet they smack of genius, and would be worth any money, were it only for the rarity of the thing!
The last sort I shall mention are โverbal criticsโโ โmere word-catchers, fellows that pick out a word in a sentence and a sentence in a volume, and tell you it is wrong.71 These erudite persons constantly find out by anticipation that you are deficient in the smallest thingsโ โthat you cannot spell certain words or join the nominative case and the verb together, because to do this is the height of their own ambition, and of course they must set you down lower than their opinion of themselves. They degrade by reducing you to their own standard of merit; for the qualifications they deny you, or the faults they object, are so very insignificant, that to prove yourself possessed of the one or free from the other is to make yourself doubly ridiculous. Littleness is their element, and they give a character of meanness to whatever they touch. They creep, buzz, and fly-blow. It is much easier to crush than to catch these troublesome insects; and when they are in your power your self-respect spares them. The race is almost extinct:โ โone or two of them are sometimes seen crawling over the pages of the Quarterly Review!
On Great and Little ThingsโThese little things are great to little man.โ
GoldsmithThe great and the little have, no doubt, a real existence in the nature of things; but they both find pretty much the same level in the mind of man. It is a common measure, which does not always accommodate itself to the size and importance of the objects it represents. It has a certain interest to spare for certain things (and no more) according to its humour and capacity; and neither likes to be stinted in its allowance, nor to muster up an unusual share of sympathy, just as the occasion may require. Perhaps, if we could recollect distinctly, we should discover that the two things that have affected us most in the course of our lives have been, one of them of the greatest, and the other of the smallest possible consequence. To let that pass as too fine a speculation, we know well enough that very trifling circumstances do give us great and daily annoyance, and as often prove too much for our philosophy and forbearance, as matters of the highest moment. A lump of soot spoiling a manโs dinner, a plate of toast falling in the ashes, the being disappointed of a ribbon to a cap or a ticket for a ball, have led to serious and almost tragical consequences. Friends not unfrequently fall out and never meet again for some idle misunderstanding, โsome trick not worth an egg,โ who have stood the shock of serious differences of opinion and clashing interests in life; and there is an excellent paper in the Tatler, to prove that if a married couple do not quarrel about some point in the first instance not worth contesting, they will seldom find an opportunity afterwards to quarrel about a question of real importance. Grave divines, great statesmen, and deep philosophers are put out of their way by very little things: nay, discreet, worthy people, without any pretensions but to good-nature and common sense, readily surrender the happiness of their whole lives sooner than give up an opinion to which they have committed themselves, though in all likelihood it was the mere turn of a feather which side they should take in the argument. It is the being baulked or thwarted in anything that constitutes the grievance, the unpardonable affront, not the value of the thing to which we had made up our minds. Is it that we despise little things; that we are not prepared for them; that they take us in our careless, unguarded moments, and tease us out of our ordinary patience by their petty, incessant, insect warfare, buzzing about us and stinging us like gnats, so that we can neither get rid of nor grapple with them; whereas we collect all our fortitude and resolution to meet evils of greater magnitude? Or is it that there is a certain stream of irritability that is continually fretting upon the wheels of life, which finds sufficient food to play with in straws and feathers, while great objects are too much for it, either choke it up, or divert its course into serious and thoughtful interest? Some attempt might be made to explain this in the following manner.
One is always more vexed at losing a game of any sort by a single hole or ace than if one has never had a chance of winning it. This is no doubt in part or chiefly because the prospect of success irritates the subsequent disappointment. But people have been known to pine and fall sick from holding the next number to the twenty thousand pound prize in the lottery. Now this could only arise from their being so near winning in fancy, from there seeming to be so thin a partition between them and success. When they were within one of the right number, why could they not
Comments (0)